1.3.1 Operational Scenarios

From the perspective of the use of radiocommunications means in PPDR operations, three distinct radio operating environments are usually defined that impose different requirements on the use of PPDR applications and their importance:

• Day-to-day operations . Day-to-day operations encompass the routine operations that PPDR agencies conduct within their jurisdiction. Typically, these operations are within national borders.
• Large emergency and/or public events . Large emergencies and/or public events are those that PP and potentially DR agencies respond to in a particular area of their jurisdiction. However, they are still required to perform their routine operations elsewhere within their jurisdiction. The size and nature of the event may require additional PPDR resources from adjacent jurisdictions, cross-border agencies or international organizations. In most cases, there are either plans in place, or there is some time to plan and coordinate the requirements. A large fire encompassing three to four blocks in a large city or a large forest fire are examples of a large emergency under this scenario. Likewise, a large public event (national or international) could include the G8 Summit, the Olympics, etc.
• Disasters . Disasters can be those caused by either natural or human activity. For example, natural disasters include an earthquake, a major tropical storm, a major ice storm, floods, etc. Examples of disasters caused by human activity include large-scale criminal incidences or situations of armed conflict. Given the large numbers of people that may be impacted by a disaster, the considerable potential for property damage and the risk to social cohesion in the aftermath of a disaster, effectiveness of cross-border PPDR operation or international mutual aid could be largely beneficial.

The above operational scenarios are found in one or a number of the following domains, which also have an impact on the definition of requirements for the equipment including communications systems [6]:

• Urban environment. Identifies an area in a city or a densely urbanized area. It has usually high density of people and buildings. Emergency crisis and other types of PS scenarios in an urban environment are often characterized by a limited area of operation (hundreds of meters to few km), presence of man-made obstacles and need for a high reaction speed. Urban environment may have many facilities, but traffic congestion may limit the mobility of PPDR responders.
• Rural environment. Identifies an area, which is not densely urbanized like countryside, mountains, hills or forest areas. There may be natural obstacles like mountains and hills. An emergency crisis in a rural area may be quite large for the geographical extension (tens of square kilometer). A rural environment does not have usually an extensive communications infrastructure.
• Blue and/or green borders. Identifies the border between land and sea or a major lake (blue border) or between two and more different political regions in the land (green border). We can make a distinction between a border included in a single political or governmental region (i.e. national context) and a border across different political or governmental regions (i.e. cross-national context). Because different PPDR organizations are likely to operate in the second case, interoperability requirements may be more relevant.
• Port or airport. A port or airport has similar features to the urban environment as it is usually limited in size (few square kilometer). In comparison to a generic urban environment, there is a larger presence of critical facilities (e.g. traffic control centre) which should be protected or whose services should be maintained. Critical facilities like deposit of dangerous materials with inflammable or chemical substances may also be present.

The following dimensions are useful to capture the characteristics that are relevant to PPDR communications used in the different operational scenarios:

• Geographical extension. This dimension describes the size of the area involved in the emergency crisis.
• Environment complexity. This dimension represents the complexity of the emergency crisis in terms of number of entities involved, difficulty of the environment and so on.
• Crisis severity. This dimension represents the risk for the security of the citizens, infrastructures and environment.

Most day-to-day operations are conducted in low-/medium-coverage extensions and show a low environment complexity (i.e. personnel from a single agency involved) and the crisis severity is low. In turn, a natural disaster such as a flooding or an earthquake is likely to affect a large regional area and requires a complex emergency response (i.e. involving a number of PPDR agencies, volunteers and militaries), and infrastructures (e.g. transportation, communications) can be severely degraded or destroyed during a natural disaster.

1.3.2 Framework for PPDR Operations

PPDR operations usually involve [9]:

• Intervention teams on the field, composed of first responder officers carrying out their professional core missions and tasks (e.g. law enforcement, firefighting, medical assistance, search and rescue).
• Intervention team leaders on the field (integrated in intervention teams or in mobile command rooms). The leader must have the intelligence of the mission and the way to perform it. As to radiocommunications employed in the operation, team leaders master the radio scheme of their mission, for example, who has to speak with whom and on which talk groups.
• Dispatchers or operators in the control rooms, supporting the intervention teams on the field and their leaders in the execution of their professional core missions and tasks as well as by managing their radiocommunications (e.g. patching of talk groups). Control rooms, also referred to as emergency control centres (ECCs), are operational centres typically deployed per PPDR service/discipline (e.g. police, EMS, firefighting have separate control rooms). Control rooms house a number of operational systems including radio dispatcher terminals, computer-aided dispatching (CAD) systems for coordination and control, information systems (e.g. Geographical Information Systems (GIS)) and integrated communication control systems with connectivity to other control rooms and networks.
• Back-office support teams (e.g. network operator, manufacturers), which are not directly involved in the operations with first responders, but are responsible for the technical–operational conception, design and implementation of the radiocommunication systems that first responders use (e.g. data bases pre-provisioning, adjustment of technical–operational parameters, technical maintenance).

An emergency can be handled by a single PPDR agency, or it may require the participation of a number of them. Agencies involved in the emergency can be in charge of the same or different services (e.g. an emergency situation requiring only police forces vs. an emergency where police, fire and EMS are involved). Moreover, the involved agencies may be acting in their own jurisdiction or be displaced from other jurisdictions to assist in an incident (e.g. local, regional, national). The resulting combinations can lead to the following hierarchy levels of communications [5]:

• Intra-agency communications, thus involving a single PPDR service/single jurisdiction
• Inter-agency communications, involving (i) single PPDR service/multiple jurisdictions, (ii) multiple PPDR services/single jurisdiction and (iii) multiple PPDR services/multiple jurisdictions

These hierarchical levels define increasingly complex communications interactions and administration as the hierarchy moves from the single PPDR service/single jurisdiction situation to the multiple services/multiple jurisdictions events. Interoperability is key for inter-agency coordination. Interoperability impacts on the organizational and procedural aspects as well as on technical means (e.g. communications systems) used by the involved agencies. Technology provides tools to improve the effectiveness and efficiency when handling the tasks and procedures but can never replace the responsibility of the authorities and PPDR agencies and the correct application of their agreed procedures in the event of an incident. Inter-agency interoperability can be classified in the following three modes of operation [5]:

1. Day to day. This includes routine operations with neighbouring agencies to provide support or backup. This form of interoperability makes up the most of an individual first responder’s multi-agency activities.
2. Task force . The task force mode defines a cooperative effort between specific agencies with extensive pre-planning and practice of the operation. This includes cooperative efforts among mixed yet specific agencies and services such as operations that are planned or scheduled and are proactive and operations that have a common goal, common leader and common communications.
3. Mutual aid . The mutual aid mode describes major events with large numbers of agencies involved, including agencies from remote locations. Their communications are not usually well planned or rehearsed. The communications must allow the individual agencies to carry out their missions at the event, but follow the command and control structure appropriate to coordinate the many agencies involved with the event. This could be needed in a major event that causes a large number of agencies to respond from multiple jurisdictions. Considerable coordination is required.

Considering that the majority (as much as 90% according to Ref. [13]) of the communications usage falls under the day-to-day operations mode, the communications systems must support the day-to-day operations with all the same performance features that may be required to support the other modes of operation. Unless the systems provide the first responders with seamless functionality regardless of the mode of operation, the first responders will not use their systems efficiently or effectively, especially when they need to operate in the task force and mutual aid modes.

PPDR operations follow a strict command and control hierarchy. In the context of an important event (disaster-like), incident command structures (ICS) are established. An ICS, regardless of national variations, can be typically divided into three discrete levels of management [8]: strategic overview, tactical management and operational implementation. The scope of each level is outlined in Table 1.1.

In various countries and indeed organizations within national boundaries, these structural levels have been designated with names to enable their easy identification: Gold/Silver/Bronze or Level 1/Level 2/Level 3 is the terminology commonly used. ‘Gold’, ‘Silver’ and ‘Bronze’ are titles of functions adopted by each of the emergency services and are role, not rank, related (i.e. titles do not convey seniority of service or rank, but depict the function carried out by that particular person). In high-profile incidents, particularly those such as terrorist incidents where there is a significant national/political involvement, it is not unusual for some to attempt to define a ‘super-strategic’ or ‘platinum’ level above the three levels described previously.

It is possible that, early on in the incident, members of one PPDR service will spontaneously carry out tasks normally under the responsibility of another. As soon as sufficient staff arrives, each service is expected to establish unequivocal command and control of functions for which it is normally responsible. Therefore, each of the first responder disciplines may have its own branch commanders at a large incident. As the incident progresses, it is essential that these branch commanders are able to coordinate, communicate and share information among them.

Command and control of functions are likely to be discrete in the early stages of an incident. As the incident progresses, at some stage they may move (certainly at strategic level) into one central location. At the tactical level, there may be a combination of discrete, technologically combined or physically co-located control centres, depending on a number of factors including technological systems in use, geographical location and the actual nature of the incident. The high command levels are usually operating outside the affected area.

The formation of both a Gold and Silver coordinating group can be of great value at all major incidents. Therefore, at some point during the early part of the operation, one or more tactical-level mobile control centres may be established at designated locations. Each of these should have direct voice/data communications links back to their respective permanent control centres. The staff with these mobile control centres would take control of the personnel dealing with the incident and inform the strategic-level command structure on the progress being made to address the strategy for the incident.

Some major incidents may be so quickly resolved that there is no requirement to convene a Gold coordinating group. Where a Gold coordinating group is convened, it initially consists primarily of the police, fire brigades and EMS services [8]. Additional Gold level representation from other agencies will be dependent upon the requirements of the incident (e.g. nature scale and dynamics).

The command and control structure should allow PPDR personnel to work seamlessly on situations that may begin small, but can evolve into large incidents requiring many resources and assistance from numerous jurisdictions. As an incident grows in magnitude, the incident commander has to know what resources and capabilities are becoming available for use and, if necessary, request the temporary assistance of personnel and equipment of other agencies. PPDR services are required to develop working arrangements according to circumstances.

Based on the earlier considerations, it becomes evident that multiple voice and data communications flows maybe required among intervention teams/units on the field, potentially belonging to different PPDR agencies, tactical-level mobile control centres established at designated locations within the incident area and tactical- and strategic-level control centres in remote locations outside the incident area. Figure 1.2 illustrates some of these potential communications flows in a typical ICS, distinguishing those likely to be supported over radio links from those provided over wired links and systems.

1.3.3 Communications’ Reference Points in PPDR Operations

A comprehensive generic model that captures the major components and reference points between PPDR responders, authorities and other entities that may be involved in routine or emergency situations has been developed within the ETSI Special Committee on Emergency Communications (ETSI SC EMTEL) [3]. The model is illustrated in Figure 1.3.

A central component of the model is the ECC. ECCs are operational centres typically deployed per PPDR service/discipline (e.g. police, EMS, firefighting) that house a number of operational systems (e.g. dispatcher consoles, CAD and GIS tools) and are interconnected to other ECCs and a variety of networks (e.g. public telephone networks, Internet).

Another central element in emergency handling is the so-called public safety answering point (PSAP). The PSAP is a physical location where emergency calls from citizens are received and, if necessary, forwarded to the competent ECC(s).

In exceptional situations (e.g. large emergencies and disasters), special task force or temporary headquarters can be established for emergency coordination so that communications are needed among these temporary facilities and ECCs and intervention teams on the field. Also, the involvement of public authorities (local, regional, national) may be required as well as the coordination with other non-PPDR entities that may also have a central role in the emergency response (e.g. telecom operators, utilities, information agencies such as weather forecasting, media, etc.).

The kind of actions that require communications and the main communications needs across the reference points depicted in Figure 1.3 (i.e. points tagged from (A) to (F)) are described in the following:

• Communications among PPDR Unit/Teams on the Field: (A)

  The intervention teams (also referred to as mobile teams) need facilities for communication among team members as well as for communications with other mobile teams. The need is for communication across the services involved, as well as within each service. Communications at this level mainly aim at the following:

  • Management of the teams and operational coordination
  • Reassessing on a continuous basis the overall situation and the priority of the missions
  • Enabling the reporting within the teams
  • Enabling the teams to call for additional support and other resources
  • Exchanging information for guidance of the staff on the spot, assessment of the injuries and preparation of fixed rescue facilities before arrival of injured people

  Officers on the field have to spend a minimum of time and capacity with radio transmission. Therefore, the radio procedures they apply must be kept as simple as possible (e.g. terminal manipulations, like talk group selection, shall be strictly limited).

  The intervention team leader(s) on the field (integrated in intervention teams or in mobile command rooms) must have the intelligence of the mission and the way to perform it. In particular, besides the basic officer radiocommunication knowledge, they need to master the radio scheme of their mission, that is, who has to speak with whom and, in application of a functional radio model, on which talk groups.

  Interoperability between the communications systems in use is essential. In addition, fallback communications service needs to be available to the field teams in cases where network service is either unavailable or disturbed due to the nature of the emergency/disaster.

• Communications among ECCs and Intervention Units/Teams on the Field: (B)

  The access to permanent bidirectional communications links between ECCs and their mobile teams is crucial in the handling of emergencies. These communications links enable the same kind of functions discussed previously for communications among teams but now involve PPDR personnel on control rooms (e.g. operational dispatchers, tactical/strategic-level commanders) as well as the use of supporting tools and systems (e.g. GIS-based applications) that can greatly improve emergency response.

  Dispatcher(s) or operators in the control rooms give support to the intervention teams on the field and their leaders in the execution of their professional core missions and tasks. Depending on the governance model, dispatchers will only assist and coordinate the teams on behalf of an end chief or will also have the lead on them. Dispatchers also give support by managing the radiocommunications used by intervention teams. Therefore, dispatchers must have a solid understanding of the functional radio model and the related operational radio procedures to face an evolving or an unexpected situation.

  Through the ECC, communications can be established between all involved parties (mobile team members, control room staff, receiving and assisting units/institutions). Among the main features needed for this type of communications are:

  • Seamless radio coverage throughout the affected area, including guaranteed availability of coverage also under exceptional conditions as well as means to maintain communication during network outage.
  • Enough traffic capacity at the incident. The need for radio capacity is increasing during major incidents and accidents. Efforts have to be made to ensure as far as possible that sufficient communications facilities are available.
  • Sufficient voice quality not to impair the understanding of the message.
  • Specialized features at the disposal of dispatchers to regulate, in real time, the radiocommunications such as combining (patching) of groups, remotely programming extra groups on terminals and remotely selecting groups on terminals. In addition, access to the network shall be controlled by using functionalities such as assigning priority to potential users, thereby restricting some parties from access to the network under certain circumstances.
• Communications among ECCs: (C)ECCs need to have the facilities to collaborate with other ECCs, either within the same service or across services (e.g. between fire and EMS). Interconnection of ECCs may rely on the use of fibre-optic, microwave, and copper landline systems to provide backbone links for voice and data applications. Examples of cases where this is needed are:
  • Callers are transferred to the wrong ECC so that the call needs to be forwarded to the correct ECC together with additional information (e.g. location data).
  • Cases involving more than one ECC (e.g. fires with risks for human lives that typically involve fire, health and police, CBRN incidents (or suspected incidents), terrorism).
  • The communications facilities exist to integrate the resources from two or more ECCs, in case of a larger emergency situation.
  Communications requirements among ECCs must:
  • Establish communications links to support a number of services, including speech and data.
  • Conform to the relevant procedures established by the ECCs or their organizations.
  • Support conference calls including external resources that may need to be set up and kept over a substantial amount of time. In contingencies, calls to external resources may be required.
• Communications among ECCs and PSAPs: (D)

  PSAP and ECC are two different functionalities that may or may not be integrated. The PSAP will, after reception of an emergency call from an individual/citizen, communicate without delay with the competent ECC and transmit the location and nature of the emergency of the calling party along with any other relevant information that may be available associated with the call.

  For this purpose, reliable and pre-planned communications links among all of the ECCs in the competence zone of the emergency situation must enable to transmit voice and transfer all the data received at the PSAP (especially location data) or collected by the operator of the PSAP.

• Communications among PSAPs: (E)

  PSAPs normally work independently and their interrelation is not subject to special needs.

  In cases where calls arrive at another PSAP than the one responsible for the area where the call is originated (e.g. mobile phones in the bordering area between different PSAPs), there may be a need to transfer the call together with additional information (e.g. location data). The need will depend upon the operation rules that have been established for these types of situation, for example:

  • The call is handled by the receiving PSAP (e.g. the immediate help is a key point in the case, the case of PSAP backup, or load sharing).
  • The call is immediately transferred to the normal PSAP, which handles all the case. In such a scenario, the location data must remain accessible to the normal PSAP, as for any received call.
  • Depending on local procedures, the receiving PSAP may transfer the call directly to the relevant ECC, possibly together with information to the correct PSAP that the call has been transferred.

  It is the responsibility of the PSAPs or their organization to predefine these rules of procedures.

• Communications among Special Task Force or Temporary Headquarters and Permanent Entities in Special Conditions: (F)

  For their efficient work in handling emergencies, special task force or temporary headquarters and ECCs are depending on access to permanent bidirectional links with the mobile teams and temporary headquarters. This access needs to be available for the duration of the emergency/disaster. The basic need is for configurable communications, to fulfil all contingency plans for, under the possible stages of escalation for a simple emergency situation, through a crisis to a regional or national disaster.

  A much more extended description of the functional requirements for communications for all of the earlier reference points in PPDR communications can be found in Refs [3, 9].

1.3.4 Communications Services Needed for PPDR Operations

PPDR communications have to be effective, fast, reliable, secure and interoperable where possible, in order not to put at risk the success of PPDR operations. The efficiency of the emergency operation is dependent upon the ability of the communications network to deliver a real-time exchange of information between several authorized emergency personal. As discussed in the previous subsection, this can occur at various levels in the emergency situation, for example, between agents on the field, between officers in the ECCs and the agents on the field and, in major incidents, between any established temporary coordination headquarter and the involved ECCs.

To emphasize the criticality of PPDR communications needs, two types of operational situations addressed by PPDR organizations are typically defined [10]:

1. Mission-critical situations. The expression ‘mission critical’ is used for situations where human life, rescue operations and law enforcement are at stake and PPDR organizations cannot afford the risk of having transmission failures in their voice and data communications or for police in particular to be ‘eavesdropped’.
2. Non-mission-critical situations. This refers to situations where communication needs are non-critical: human life and properties are not at stake, administrative tasks for which the time and security elements are not critical, etc.

Therefore, it can be stated that mission-critical communications refer to any information transfer that becomes crucial to the successful resolution of a PPDR operation.¹ Table 1.2 provides a common classification of the communications services that public safety agencies (PSAs) require to handle mission-critical operations [5]. The classification distinguishes between voice and data services and, for each of them, the level of interactivity required. Voice is so far the most important communications mechanism for mission-critical operations, though it is worth noting that over time the definition of mission critical will remain ever changing and the demands of tomorrow’s first responders may change. In fact, data communications are becoming increasingly important to PPDR practitioners to provide the information needed to carry out their missions so that some data applications will likely become mission critical in the future. Additional details on voice and data services are provided in the following subsection.

1.4.1 General PPDR Requirements on Communications Systems

Due to its unique operational requirements, PPDR has multiple complex communications technology needs. These requirements involve communications solutions that in some cases are unique to PPDR. General requirements for PPDR communication systems have been widely discussed [1, 3, 5]. A comprehensive view of the type of requirements that should be accounted for are given in the following:

• Service capabilities and performance. Central service capabilities required for PPDR are PTT operations, broadcasting/group communications and talk around (i.e. direct mode, terminal to terminal) for voice communications. There may be additional requirements in terms of data services (e.g. status messaging, short messaging, automatic vehicle location (AVL) and tracking) and supplementary services such as ambience listening, dynamic group number assignment (DGNA), call authorization by dispatchers, late entry and many others. Fast responsiveness and low latency requirements are typically required for these services (e.g. fast call set-up below 300 ms and end-to-end voice delay in the range of 200 ms). The equipment in use is typically required to support most of these service capabilities, while the user is in motion. The equipment may also require high audio output (to overcome high-noise environment); unique accessories, such as special microphones; operation while wearing gloves; operation in hostile environments (heat, cold, dust, rain, water, shock, vibration, explosive environments, etc.); and long battery life.
• Strict control of the communications means. This includes centralized dispatch for coordination and control of communications channels within the PPDR system together with the administration of terminal, subscriber and group call settings (e.g. group monitoring, dynamic regrouping, etc.). This also encompasses the support of prioritization mechanisms to make sure that important calls are always treated first in case of system congestion. The supported priorities may be required to reflect a hierarchy (among people or departments) but also an operational situation requiring special treatment of the call, whatever the hierarchy of the person. Prioritization may include pre-emptive emergency call capabilities, overriding if necessary ongoing low priority communications.
• Security-related requirements. Efficient and reliable PPDR communications within a PPDR organization and between various PPDR organizations, which are capable of secure operation, may be required. Security requirements may cover the need for subscriber/network authentication and support of encryption and integrity mechanisms over the radio interface and, in some cases, even require the use of end-to-end encryption (E2EE) between the endpoint terminals. Notwithstanding, there may be occasions where administrations or organizations, which need secure communications, bring specific equipment to meet their own security requirements. Furthermore, it should be noted that many administrations have regulations limiting the use of secure communications for visiting PPDR users.
• Coverage. The PPDR system is usually required to provide complete coverage for ‘normal’ traffic within the relevant jurisdiction and/or operation (national, provincial/state or at the local level). This coverage is required 24 h/day, 365 days/year. Usually, the systems supporting PPDR organizations are designed for peak loads and wide fluctuations in use. Additional resources, enhancing system capacity, may be added during an incident by techniques such as reconfiguration of networks with intensive use of direct mode and vehicular repeaters, which may be required for coverage of localized areas. Systems supporting PPDR are also usually required to provide reliable indoor and outdoor coverage, coverage in remote areas and coverage in underground or inaccessible areas (e.g. tunnels, building basements). Coverage requirements can be specified as, for example, 99.5% (outdoor mobile) and 65% or better (indoor mobile). Appropriate redundancy to continue operations when the equipment/infrastructure fails is extremely beneficial. PPDR systems are not generally installed inside numerous buildings. PPDR entities do not have a continuous revenue stream to support installation and maintenance of an intensive variable density infrastructure. Urban PPDR systems are designed for highly reliable coverage of personal stations outdoors with limited access indoors by direct propagation through the building walls. Subsystems may be installed in specific building or structures (e.g. tunnels) if penetration through the walls is insufficient. PPDR systems tend to use larger radius cells and higher-power mobile and personal stations than commercial service providers.
• Capacity. Very low call blocking levels are typically required in PPDR systems (e.g. well below 1% under worst-case dimensioning assumptions). The system capacity must be sufficient to manage the anticipated traffic and yet be flexible enough in its functional design to also support communication during ‘surge’ conditions which exceed the anticipated traffic, for example, by using additional transportable switch and base stations. Sufficient data bandwidth may be also required to support a wide variety of data applications. Noting the extreme circumstances that may be in force during an emergency, it may be desirable for networks to degrade gracefully when user requirements exceed the normal levels of service.
• High levels of service availability. Service availability relates to the amount of time (usually per year) that a service is up and running. It is commonly measured in ‘nines’ of availability (e.g. 99.9 or 99.99% availability at all times is a typical requirement for PPDR applications). The achievement of high levels of service availability may require several layers of redundancy as well as resilient and robust equipment (e.g. hardware, software, operational and maintenance aspects).
• System reconfiguration. A rapid dynamic reconfiguration of the system serving PPDR may be required. This includes robust operation, administration and maintenance (OAM) systems offering status and dynamic reconfiguration. For instance, system capability to reprogramme field units over the air could be extremely beneficial.
• Interconnection. While PPDR systems are mainly intended to provide private, in-system communications, appropriate levels of interconnection to public telecommunications networks may also be required. The decision regarding the level of interconnection (i.e. all mobile terminals vs. a percentage of terminals) may be based on the particular PPDR operational requirements. Furthermore, the specific access to the public telecommunications network (i.e. directly from mobile or through the PPDR dispatch) may also be based on the particular PPDR operational requirements.
• Interoperability. Communications interoperability might be required at different levels of a PPDR operation, from the most basic level, that is, a firefighter of one organization communicating with a firefighter of another, up to the highest levels of command and control. Usually, coordination of tactical communications between the on-scene or incident commanders of multiple PPDR agencies is required. Remarkably, the achievement of the desired interoperability is not only a technical matter but spans from organizational and operational aspects to regulatory and legal frameworks. Mainly from a technical perspective, various options are available to facilitate communications interoperability between multiple agencies. These include, but are not limited to, the use of common frequencies and equipment, communication via dispatch centres/patches, interconnection of the PPDR networks via wire line interfaces or utilizing technologies such as radio gateways (e.g. ‘back-to-back’ gateways or relays) or more advanced software-defined radio (SDR) equipment.
• Spectrum usage and management. Depending on national frequency allocations, PPDR users must share with other terrestrial mobile users for some applications (e.g. point-to-point radio links). The detailed arrangements regarding sharing of the spectrum vary from country to country. Furthermore, there may be several different types of systems supporting PPDR operating in the same geographical area. Therefore, interference to systems supporting PPDR from non-PPDR users should be minimized as much as possible. Depending on the national regulations, the systems supporting PPDR may be required to use specific channel spacing between mobile and base station transmit frequencies. Each administration has the discretion to determine suitable spectrum for PPDR.
• Regulatory compliance. The systems supporting PPDR should comply with the relevant national regulations. In border areas (near the boundary between countries), suitable coordination of frequencies should be arranged, as appropriate. The capability of the systems supporting PPDR to support extended coverage into the neighbouring countries should also comply with regulatory agreements between the neighbours. For DR communications, administrations are encouraged to adhere to the principles of the Tampere Convention. Flexibility should be afforded to PPDR users to employ various types of systems (e.g. HF, satellite, terrestrial, amateur, Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS)) at the scene of the incident in times of large emergencies and disasters.
• (Last but not least) Cost-related requirements. Cost-effective solutions and applications are extremely important to PPDR users. The deployment of dedicated PPDR networks is usually very demanding for PPDR organizations from an economic point of view. A national or regional network is usually an investment for 10–15 years or more. This can be facilitated by open standards, a competitive marketplace and economies of scale. Furthermore, cost-effective solutions that are widely used can reduce the deployment and upgradeability costs of permanent network infrastructure. Administrations should consider the cost implications of interoperable equipment since this requirement should not be so expensive as to preclude implementation within an operational context.

It is noted that individual administrations or PPDR organizations may have their own requirements for PPDR that go beyond those described herein and that each standard would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis against those requirements.

1.4.2 Technologies in Use for PPDR Communications

A common classification of technologies used for PPDR communications is based on the average data rates required by the supported PPDR applications [1]:

• Narrowband (NB) . It refers to technologies mainly intended to deliver voice-centric communications and low-speed data applications. Typical data rates are up to a few tenths of kilobits per second, operating on radio-frequency channels of up to 25 kHz. Current state of the art in the PPDR sector are digital radio trunking technologies such as TETRA, TETRAPOL and Project 25 (P25), which are commonly used to deploy wide area coverage networks. These technologies are typically referred to as professional/private mobile radio (PMR) technologies (the term land mobile radio (LMR) is also common in North America), though it’s worth noting that PMR technologies are not only used in the PPDR sector but also adopted in many other markets such as transportation, utilities, industry, private security and even military. A further insight into the main NB PMR standards used for PPDR communications is addressed in Section 1.4.3
• Wideband (WB) . It refers to technologies that can deliver application data rates of several hundreds of kilobits per second (e.g. in the range of 384–500 kb/s). Systems for WB applications to support PPDR have been or are underdevelopment in various standards organizations. The most significant example in the context of PPDR is the evolution of TETRA, known as TETRA Enhanced Data Service (TEDS), that adds support for more efficient modulations and the use of radio-frequency channels of up to 150 kHz wide. Nevertheless, WB technologies have not been yet widely deployed as their NB counterparts. The point is that WB technology is currently regarded as not sufficient to meet future PPDR demands so that the natural upgrade from NB to WB technology is likely to be bypassed. A migration path from NB to BB and their coexistence is as of today the most likely migration scenario.
• Broadband (BB) . It refers to technologies that enable an entirely new level of functionality with additional capacity to support higher-speed data communications than WB, likely including high-resolution video transmission. Initially, the use of BB technologies was mainly intended to support PPDR operations in localized areas (e.g. 1 km² or less), providing indicative data rates in the range of several megabits per second. Localized operational scenarios open up numerous new possibilities for PPDR applications, including tailored area networks, hot spot deployment and ad hoc networks. In this regard, specialized communications gear such as tactical networking equipment [16] intended to fulfil PPDR responders’ needs is already available, though its adoption by PPDR practitioners is very limited (its use is basically confined to the military domain). These communications systems are typically based on Wi-Fi-like radio interfaces and can operate in open bands, such as the 2.4- and 5.8-GHz Wi-Fi bands, and/or on restricted bands, such as the 4.4-GHz (allocated to military use in some countries) and 4.9-GHz bands (allocated to PPDR use in some countries). However, in addition to localized service, the demand for BB applications is now importantly shifting towards wide area coverage. In this context, the current mainstream commercial Long-Term Evolution (LTE) technology ecosystem is consolidating as the ‘de facto’ standard for the delivery of mobile BB PPDR applications.

Table 1.4 gives an overview of the various PPDR applications alongside the particular feature provided and specific PPDR examples of use, as developed in Report ITU-R M.2033 [1]. The applications are grouped under the NB, WB and BB headings to indicate which technologies are most likely to be required to supply the particular application and their features. Application types listed in the table can be used in any of the operational environments described in Section 1.3.2. The detailed choice of PPDR applications and features to be provided in any given area by PPDR is a national or operator-specific matter.

1.4.3 Current NB PMR Standards Used in PPDR

The requirements of the PPDR community for mission-critical voice and data services are currently satisfied by a range of voice-centric NB technologies such as TETRA, TETRAPOL, DMR and P25. These are all NB digital trunking systems able to offer a wide range of voice-centric services and features but limited data capability. In addition to these digital systems, analogue systems, both conventional² and trunked, still remain operational in some places (e.g. VHF FM radios, MPT1327 systems) [17]. Nevertheless, as digital standards become more mature and more manufacturers release low-cost digital products, there is a steady migration to digital technologies, further facilitated by the fact that some of the digital standards can operate in dual mode to maintain analogue and digital compatibility and ensure an easy migration.

Within digital systems, both frequency division multiple access (FDMA) and time division multiple access (TDMA) technologies are used. Most current FDMA and TDMA products can offer the equivalent of one voice channel per 6.25 kHz of RF channel bandwidth. FDMA systems can be typically programmed to use either 6.25- or 12.5-kHz channels, while TDMA typically offers only a set of two or four voice channels (slots) carried inside a 12.5- or 25-kHz RF channel. FDMA and TDMA each have certain advantages for specific uses. For instance, an FDMA system using a single 6.25-kHz RF channel has an extra 3 decibels (dB) of sensitivity and less noise than other offerings in 12.5 or 25 kHz. Therefore, if there is a need to operate a voice channel over a long distance and in a noisier-than-normal RF environment, a single 6.25-kHz FDMA is likely to outperform the other radios in range and noise tolerance. On the other hand, if the requirements include mostly data communications, a TDMA radio like TETRA can offer the highest data bandwidth by aggregating the four voice channels into a single 25-kHz data channel.

PMR technologies are used in the PPDR domain to deploy from small-scale systems with only one or a few sites serving the needs of an individual agency to nationwide networks shared by multiple PPDR organizations. Indeed, in Europe, national multi-agency networks with countrywide coverage have been (some are still being) deployed in most countries based on TETRA and TETRAPOL technologies. In turn, a more complex environment is found in the United States where there is a plethora of independent systems deployed at different jurisdictional levels (municipalities, counties) and significant efforts are being undertaken in some states towards improving interoperable communications with the deployment of statewide P25 systems. Some further details on the TETRA, TETRAPOL, DMR and P25 technologies and network deployments are given in the following subsections, including a comparative view chart of their key features in Table 1.5. A more extended description of the technical and operational characteristics of several digital PMR technologies introduced throughout the world in the PPDR and other sectors can be found in the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Report ITU-R M.2014 [18].

1.4.3.1 TETRA

TETRA is a mature and established TDMA digital voice trunked and data radio technology used around the world. TETRA is an open standard developed by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). The TETRA standard was finalized in 1995 and introduced in the market in 1997. TETRA equipment is available in the VHF, UHF and 800-MHz bands. TETRA standard confers interoperability between radio equipment from multiple vendors. The TETRA and Critical Communications Association (TCCA) was established in December 1994 (known then as the TETRA MoU Association) to create a forum to act on behalf of all parties interested in TETRA technology, representing users, manufacturers, application providers, integrators, operators, test houses and telecom agencies. A TETRA Interoperability Certification process is managed by this organization to enable an open multivendor market for TETRA equipment and systems.

The TETRA standard supports many voice-centric services and facilities. Examples are group call, pre-emptive priority call (also called ‘emergency call’),call retention, priority call, busy queuing, direct mode operation (DMO), DGNA, ambience listening, call authorized by dispatcher, late entry and many others. TETRA uses the Algebraic Code Excited Linear Prediction (ACELP) vocoder. Up to four voice channels can be supported over a single RF 25-kHz channel (four-slot TDMA).

The TETRA standard also provides some data transmission capabilities. Status messaging and short data service (SDS) are simple services that allow for the exchange of short strings of bytes. In addition to sending human-readable information, these messaging capabilities are also used as transport bearer services for applications that require very low data rates such as AVL. TETRA also supports a packet data (PD) service that provides a standard IP connectivity service that can be used to support other added-value applications with relatively higher bit rates (e.g. database lookup, picture messaging). However, the delivered data rates are peaked to 28.8 kb/s, achieved when the four slots of a 25-kHz carrier are combined and data is sent with the lowest protection for error control. To improve the support for data communication in TETRA, the ETSI Board in 2005 mandated the development of TETRA Release 2, commonly known as TEDS. TEDS offers new modulation options and wider radio channels (50, 100 and 150 kHz) to support data traffic rates of up to 500 kb/s, matching the speeds provided by cellular 2G GPRS/EDGE technology.

Other remarkable features supported by TETRA are DMO gateways, DMO repeaters and ‘fallback’ modes in TETRA base stations. A DMO gateway allows relaying the communication between a TETRA DMO terminal and a TETRA network that may not be directly reachable from that terminal. A DMO does a similar relying but now between two DMO terminals that cannot see each other. A typical application for the DMO repeater/gateway functionality is the following [19]. A DMO gateway is installed in a vehicle so that it automatically ‘bridges’ the network traffic to and from a person who left the vehicle and is working in the field, using a low-power handheld radio to talk to and from the TETRA network. With regard to the fallback mode in base stations, this allows a base station to continue to serve users if the backhaul link towards the rest of the infrastructure fails.

In terms of security, and similarly to all of the other digital PMR technologies used for PPDR communications, TETRA provides multiple security features for the verification of identities, protection of confidentiality and integrity and protection against lost or stolen terminals. In this regard, some of the main security features within the TETRA standard are the following [20]:

• Authentication. The authentication service allows a TETRA terminal and a TETRA network to prove each other’s real identity, by proving to both parties the knowledge of a shared secret key (i.e. the authentication key K), unique for each terminal and only available in the terminal and a secured server of the home TETRA network.
• Air interface encryption (AIE). The AIE service allows encrypting the ‘air interface’ (AI), signalling and voice, between a TETRA terminal and its serving TETRA network. The TETRA standard supports a number of over-the-air TETRA Encryption Algorithms (TEAs), the differences being the types of users who are permitted to use them. Encryption keys can be static (e.g. usually preconfigured in the terminals) or dynamic (derived per connection as needed). Over-the-air rekeying (OTAR) methods are supported in TETRA to transfer in real-time secret keys securely to terminals.
• Enable and disable. This service provides a mechanism by which a terminal can be denied or allowed access to a TETRA system.
• Support for E2EE. It allows two parties to communicate in secure mode by ciphering the whole communication data at terminal level. In this case, a variety of other encryption algorithms can be used as deemed necessary by the national security organizations.

A schematic of a TETRA network architecture showing the standardized interfaces is depicted in Figure 1.4. The core of a TETRA network, named Switching and Management Infrastructure (SwMI), consists of a number of radio base stations (RBS) interconnected through one or a hierarchy of switches and/or routers (routers would be used in the case of TETRA over IP implementations). Typical components connected to the SwMI include the network management system, control room systems such as line dispatchers, PABX/PSTN/ISDN interconnections and IP gateways for PD networks. The gateway interfaces to PSTN, ISDN and PD networks have been standardized, in addition to an Inter-system Interface (ISI) intended to interconnect TETRA networks. The remaining interfaces within the SwMI are proprietary implementations (vendor Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), which allow access to some of the SwMI services and functions). It is worth noting that the internal interface within the SwMI between the RBS and the switching/routing elements is not standardized either. On the radio side, two modes for the operation of the AI have been standardized: trunked mode operation (TMO) and DMO. A standardized Peripheral Equipment Interface (PEI) is also available. The PEI allows splitting the TETRA terminal in two separate devices: the terminal equipment (TE) and the mobile termination (MT). The equipment may be a PC or any other computing device, while the MT acts like a modem.

TETRA has been proven a suitable technology for large mission-critical networks. The ETSI TETRA standard has been deployed in over 120 countries worldwide, and, even though TETRA has been commonly adopted by many types of professional users, the emergency service sector remains the largest group of users using this standard. Indeed, most EU member states have rolled out national TETRA networks for PPDR (e.g. Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Sweden, etc.).

With regard to TEDS, equipment supporting the new data features entered the market in 2008–2009. However, the adoption of TEDS is still quite limited (TEDS is currently being deployed in some Northern countries). TETRA networks are also being deployed in North America, now that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) allows the technology to be used there, but not for PS where the P25 standard is used.

1.4.4 Main Limitations with Today’s PPDR Communications Systems

Effective interoperable communications can mean the difference between life and death. Unfortunately, inadequate and unreliable communications have compromised emergency response operations for decades. Emergency responders need to share vital information via voice and data across services/disciplines and jurisdictions to successfully respond to day-to-day incidents and large-scale emergencies. Responders often have difficulty communicating when adjacent agencies are assigned to different radio bands, use incompatible proprietary systems and infrastructure and lack adequate standard operating procedures and effective multi-jurisdictional, multidisciplinary governance structures. This diversity is reflected in the different types of equipment and use of radio-frequency spectrum bands by PPDR organizations. Operational procedures are also quite different, which is a major problem for border security organizations.

The issues and problems identified with today’s PPDR communications system can be well explained through the analysis of PPDR operations in a major incident.

PPDR scenarios have been described in a number of projects and initiatives (e.g. [5, 12, 23, 24]. The one described here was developed within the European research project HELP [25]. The scenario creates a hypothetical location, incident circumstances and response. However, the resources available at such a location are realistic as are the varied PPDR communications means available. For the purposes of emergency services operating methods and requirements, it is reasonable to suggest that, to a certain extent at least, ‘an incident is an incident’. This means recognizing that, while there will be issues of scalability and certain incident-specific criteria (such as cross-border communication), it is both unnecessary and unrealistic to manufacture either large numbers of small-scale scenarios or one which is based on a colossal, continent-wide scale. It is far better to create a feasible, realistic incident that contains the relevant operational problems (in effect, a realistic, sequential series of events), from which a scalable technical solution can be developed. This approach is followed in the scenario developed in Project HELP, which concentrates on the early stages of a major incident (see Figure 1.5), rather than the incident as a whole. The scenario describes an incident which could happen in many locations and which, although having relatively small beginnings, expands considerably over a relatively short timeline. The reasoning behind this is that if a solution can be delivered where it matters, when operational resources are limited and operational intelligence regarding the incident is still limited, then that solution can be extended into the longer term as the incident stabilizes and, ultimately, the affected area returns to a state of normality.

1.4.4.1 Description of the Area and Demographics

The location of this incident is on the coast and extending into a largely rural community of some 10 km². A coastal town of some 5000 inhabitants is divided by the mouth of a river. Beyond the town lies largely rural agricultural land that is sparsely populated.

The town contains rural police, ambulance and fire stations, all with limited capacity. In all cases, the services provide cover for the town itself and for predefined geographical areas beyond it. In the event of an incident outside this area, it is possible that some of these resources may be called to assist elsewhere. The police service provides a 24-h presence with two patrol vehicles and usually no more than four officers available at any one time. The fire and rescue service for the town is ‘retained’ (part-time), consisting of crews who are in other forms of full-time work and are called when required for fire and rescue duties by Short Message Service (SMS). The ambulance service for the area has one rapid-response vehicle. This is staffed by a skilled medical paramedic who can use specialist equipment such as defibrillators and administer controlled drugs. The vehicle is equipped accordingly. The safety of the people using the adjacent coastal area is primarily the responsibility of the local maritime rescue service. This area is serviced by an inshore patrol boat using a crew of three. The crew is provided using a ‘retained’ service and call-out system similar to (but discrete from) that of the fire and rescue service. There is a railway station in the town directly linked to the national rail network. This is policed by the national transport police. The area headquarters for each of the three principal services lie outside the scenario area. There is no hospital in the area, although there is a doctors’ surgery in the town. It provides general medical services during office hours and has no emergency response structure.

A sketch map of the area and the emergency service resources available is shown in Figure 1.6. The map shows the area geography; the location of main road and rail systems; the location of police, ambulance and fire stations; and the key installations.

1.5.1 ITU Work on Emergency Communications

The ITU was established last century as an impartial, international organization within which governments and the private sector can work together to coordinate the operation of telecommunications networks and services and advance the development of communications technology. Article 1, Section 2 of the ITU Constitution provides that ITU shall ‘promote the adoption of measures for ensuring the safety of life through the cooperation of telecommunication services’. This mandate has been further enhanced through resolutions and recommendations adopted by past and recent World Telecommunication Development Conferences (WTDC) and World Radiocommunication Conferences (WRC), and ITU’s Plenipotentiary Conferences, as well as its active role in activities related to the Tampere Convention. The Tampere Convention calls on states to facilitate the provision of prompt telecommunications assistance to mitigate the impact of a disaster and covers both the installation and operation of reliable, flexible telecommunications services [32].

ITU is organized in three sectors: Telecommunication Development (ITU-D), Standardization (ITU-T) and Radiocommunication (ITU-R). The activities concerning different aspects of emergency communications are addressed within the three sectors [27].

The core mission of the Telecommunication Development (ITU-D) Sector is to foster international cooperation and solidarity in the delivery of technical assistance and in the creation, development and improvement of telecommunications/ICT equipment and networks in developing countries. ITU-D engagement in development support for disaster communications includes partnership for direct assistance to the disaster-prone countries with technical assistance and support for operational costs, deployment of donated satellite phones in disaster-stricken areas and projects on rehabilitation and reconstruction of telecommunications infrastructure in earthquake/tsunami-hit areas. ITU-D works in close cooperation with the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) and is a member of the Working Group on Emergency Telecommunications (WGET), an open forum including all United Nations’ entities and numerous international and national and governmental organizations and NGOs involved in disaster response as well as experts from the private sector and academia. The role of the ITU-D under the Tampere Convention and other related instruments is explained in Ref. [27]. Currently, 46 countries have ratified the Tampere Convention on the Provision of Telecommunication Resources for Disaster Mitigation and Relief Operations. Further information on the role of ITU-D in emergency communications can be found at the ITU-D website [28].

Through its work on standardization, the ITU Telecommunication Standardization (ITU-T) Sector develops technical standards that facilitate the use of public telecommunications services and systems for communications during emergency, DR and mitigation operations. Although ITU-T is not involved in emergency and DR operations per se, it develops recommendations that are fundamental to the implementation of interoperable systems and telecommunications facilities that will allow relief workers to smoothly deploy telecom equipment and services. The World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (WTSA), which meets every 4 years, establishes the topics for study by the ITU-T study groups. In this context, ITU-T main activities are related to the provision of an ETS that is defined as a national service providing priority telecommunications to authorized users in times of disaster and emergencies. A number of recommendations have been developed for call priority schemes that ensure that relief workers can get communications lines when they need to. Supplement 62 to the ITU-T Q-series Recommendations [34] provides a convenient reference to assist ITU-T study groups and other national and international SDOs as they develop recommendations and standards for ETS. It identifies published ETS-related recommendations and standards as well as those currently in work programmes. Further information of the role of ITU-T in emergency communications can be found at the ITU-T website [29].

The ITU-R Sector is actually the sector more directly involved in PPDR radiocommunications regulation and standardization. The role of the ITU-R is to ensure the rational, equitable, efficient and economical use of the radio-frequency spectrum by all radiocommunication services, including satellite services. The regulatory and policy functions of ITU-R are performed by World and Regional Radiocommunication Conferences and Radiocommunication Assemblies supported by study groups. WRC are regularly held every 4–5 years, and the decisions adopted are incorporated in the Radio Regulations (RR) treaty [33].

The subject of frequency bands for PPDR communications was an important item on the agenda of the WRC held in 2003 (WRC-2003). Previously, WRC-2000 approved agenda item 1.3 for WRC-2003 to consider identification of globally/regionally harmonized bands, to the extent practicable, for the implementation of future advanced solutions to meet the needs of PP agencies, including those dealing with emergency situations and DR, and to make regulatory provisions, as necessary, taking into account Resolutions 644 (Rev. WRC-2000) and 645 (WRC-2000). These resolutions requested ITU-R study groups to pursue studies on the identification of suitable frequency bands, as well as on facilitating cross-border circulation of equipment intended for use in emergency and DR situations – the latter point reinforced by the Tampere Convention on the Provision of Telecommunication Resources for Disaster Mitigation and Relief Operations. The focus in 2003 was to identify bands for mission-critical voice and data for PPDR agencies. Resolution 646 was approved by WRC-2003 including the identified regional harmonized frequency bands. Indeed, report ITU-R M.2033 [1] was delivered in preparation for WRC-03 agenda item 1.3, which defined the PPDR objectives and requirements for the implementation of future advanced solutions to satisfy the operational needs of PPDR organizations around the year 2010. Specifically, ITU-R M.2033 identified objectives, applications, requirements, a methodology for spectrum calculations, spectrum requirements and solutions for interoperability. From 2003 till date, ITU has been continuously working on preparing reports and recommendations on PPDR, but the last adopted PPDR resolution is still Resolution 646. In the last WRC-2012, to account for the new PPDR scenarios offered by the evolution of BB technologies, it was agreed to review and revise Resolution 646 for BB PPDR under agenda item 1.3 in the forthcoming WRC-2015. In particular, Resolution 648 invited ITU-R to study technical and operational issues relating to BB PPDR and its further development and to develop recommendations, as required, on technical requirements for PPDR services and applications, the evolution of BB PPDR through advances in technology and the needs of developing countries. Further details on spectrum regulation and frequency arrangements for PPDR are provided in Chapter 6.

With respect to PPDR communications standards, ITU-R Recommendation M.2009 identifies a set of radio interface standards applicable for PPDR operations. These standards are not developed by ITU but based on common specifications issued by different SDOs. The recommendation is intended to be used by regulators, manufacturers and PPDR operators to determine the most suitable standards for their needs. However, as explicitly noted in the Recommendation, the inclusion of ITU-R M.2009 standards does not preclude the use of other standards, if so considered by the administration that is the ultimate responsible for determining which technologies to deploy for PPDR operations.

The NB standards (and respective responsible SDOs) for PPDR operations listed in ITU-R M.2009 are TETRA, P25 and DMR. In addition, the following BB technologies are also listed in ITU-R M.2009:

• IMT-2000 CDMA-MC technology, developed within 3rd Generation Partnership Project 2 (3GPP2). This is the technology used in commercial CDMA2000 networks.
• IMT-2000 CDMA-DS, specifically UTRA FDD, developed within 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP). This is the technology used in commercial UMTS systems deployed over paired bands, which are the vast majority of UMTS systems.
• OFDMA TDD WMAN, developed within the IEEE 802.16. This is the technology more commonly known as WiMAX.
• TDMA-SC, developed within 3GPP. This is the technology behind the EDGE systems evolved from the 2G GSM radio interfaces.
• IMT-2000 CDMA TDD, specifically UTRA TDD, technology is developed within 3GPP. This is the technology developed for UMTS systems to be deployed in unpaired bands.
• E-UTRA (LTE) technology, developed within 3GPP.

Further information of the role of ITU-R in emergency communications can be found at the ITU-R website [30].

1.5.2 North and Latin America Regions

In the United States, the vast majority of PPDR networks currently utilized are NB systems that are governed by Part 90 of the FCC’s rules. Part 90 consists of various services utilizing regularly interacting groups of base, mobile, portable and associated control and relay stations for private (non-profit) radiocommunications by eligible users. These systems use Project 25 (P25) suite of standards (briefly described in Section 1.4.3.4). Standardization activities related to P25 and other aspects of PPDR communications in the United States are addressed under the auspices of the TIA.

In February 2012, with the passage of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act, regulatory and financial provisions were established for the build out of a dedicated National Public Safety Broadband Network (NPSBN) in the United States. The law’s governing framework for the deployment and operation of this network, which is to be based on a single, national network architecture, is the new First Responder Network Authority (or FirstNet), an independent authority within the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). FirstNet counts with a spectrum allocation of 10 + 10 MHz in the 700-MHz band and is charged with taking ‘all actions necessary’ to build, deploy and operate the network, in consultation with PS entities at all jurisdictional levels and other key stakeholders.

In 2009, the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC), organization that provides a collective voice on communications issues for PS first responders in the United States, endorsed LTE as the favoured technology standard most suited to the development of this anticipated nationwide interoperable BB network [35]. A partnership between the NPSTC and the APCO International, which is the world’s largest organization of PS communications professionals, was established in 2013 to move forward on technical standards issues related to PS BB communications. Another leading effort from the United States towards the adoption and improvement of LTE standard capabilities for PPDR use is the Public Safety Communications Research (PSCR) program, a joint effort between the National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST) and NTIA, which coordinates interoperability testing and standards development for the nationwide PS LTE network.

In Canada, NB PPDR networks are using several LMR standards including P25 and ETSI DMR standards. Currently, the only bands where a given standard is mandated for PS spectrum in Canada is in the bands 769–775 and 799–805 MHz, where the P25 standard was selected for operation on the interoperability channels. Industry Canada (IC), a department of the Government of Canada, has also mandated that all mobiles and portables that provide voice services must be capable of operating on the interoperability channels.

The PPDR community in Canada is also engaged in the allocation of dedicated spectrum in the 700-MHz band to deploy a BB network for PPDR. The Communications Interoperability Strategy for Canada (CISC), which is the result of the collaborative efforts of leaders representing all levels of government and emergency response services from across Canada, developed an action plan that tasks national emergency management partners to develop the 700-MHz implementation strategy.

The PS community’s intent is to harmonize Canadian and US PS BB networks in the 700-MHz spectrum to enable cross-border communications in these bands and establish mechanisms/protocols to avoid interference issues.

In the Latin America region, spectrum for mobile BB PPDR has also been allocated in Brazil in the 700 MHz. Indeed, LTE deployments in very specific areas have been operational by Brazil’s army as part of the infrastructure deployed for the soccer’s World Cup in 2014. Aligned with the Brazilian approach, the Organization of American States (CITEL) recommended its member states across North, Central and South America that PPDR to consider the 700-MHz band in possible BB PPDR spectrum allocations.

1.5.3 Asia and Pacific Region

In Japan, a NB PMR standard named Integrated Dispatch Radio (IDRA) was specified by the ARIB, which is an external Ministry of Post and Telecommunication (MPT) affiliate and recognized standardization organization. The IDRA system was developed for use mainly in business-oriented mobile communications applications, encompassing emergency services to commercial and industrial organizations. In 2011, the digitization of analogue TV broadcasting service using VHF/UHF bands resulted in the allocation of 32.5 MHz out of the newly available spectrum for BB wireless communications systems for PS. Technical specifications for those BB systems have been also standardized in ARIB.

In South Korea, ETSI TETRA standards have been adopted by TTA, a non-government and non-profit organization for ICT standardization, even though TTA has also produced its own standards for satellite infra on multimedia DR. The government planned to build a mission-critical nationwide PPDR network for sharing among PPDR agencies and designated the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) to lead the program. The Korea Communications Commission (KCC) allocated the frequency spectrum of 806–811 and 851–856 MHz for the nationwide PPDR system. NEMA started implementation of the nationwide system based upon NB technology in 2003–2007. Since then, the system has been in operation in major cities and major express ways. The program was planned for the second phase of PPDR system, which includes BB service.

In China, GoTa based on CDMA and GT800 based on GSM are the popular digital trunking mobile communications systems. These systems were specified by the CCSA, a non-profit legal organization established by enterprises and institutes in China for carrying out standardization activities in the field of ICT. The Emergency Communication Special Task Group (ST3) in CCSA is responsible to carry out studies on comprehensive, managerial and architectural standards of emergency communication, including policy, network and technology supportive standards. A project called broadband wireless trunking (BWT) was launched in 2011 to support research, development, standardization and applicable evaluation for BB wireless professional communications, with the major applications focused on future PPDR [39]. The BWT project covers the stages of research, standardization and industrialization and is planned to conclude in 2018. In terms of spectrum allocation and technology, China is planning to use TDD LTE for BB PPDR in 1.4 GHz. China has also reserved frequencies in the 350–370-MHz range for national security radio networks using TETRA.

In Australia, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) is undertaking a number of initiatives to improve spectrum provisions for PPDR in Australia [40]. In particular, ACMA has already made provision for 10 MHz of spectrum from the 800-MHz band for the specific purpose of realizing a nationally interoperable cellular 4G data capability, though precise frequencies will be determined at a later stage. ACMA has also created a class licence that provides 50 MHz of spectrum in the 4.9-GHz band for PSAs to share Australia-wide. This is intended to provide very high-speed, short-range on-demand capacity to areas of high activity to support a wide range of uses.

Throughout this region, the Asia-Pacific Telecommunity (APT) members support regional harmonization of frequency bands/ranges for future deployment of BB PPDR. It is recognized that different amounts of available spectrum may be used within bands depending on their national circumstances. This will provide flexibility to decide the amount of spectrum and the frequency arrangement that best meets their overall national BB PPDR requirements.

1.5.4 Europe Region

A regional regulation exists in Europe, superseding the national regulations for some topics and therefore requesting coordination between countries. The European Commission (EC), being the executive body of the EU, is responsible for proposing legislation, adopting and implementing measures. The European Council and the European Parliament adopt directives that are implemented by member states of the EU in national laws. In this context, the provision of BB PPDR services has been identified as a policy objective in several EC provisions and reports [36, 37].

A number of European Standards Organizations (ESOs) assist the EC by producing standards and specifications supporting the EU policies. This is mainly achieved through mandates issued from the EC towards the ESOs. Mandates are statements of policy intent where the EC and the member states request the relevant ESOs and their members to develop standards (or a standardization work programme) in coordination with regulatory requirements or other policy initiatives. ETSI is the ESO more directly involved in the standardization of PPDR and emergency communications systems.

Within ETSI, an ETSI SC EMTEL was established. The primary responsibility ETSI SC EMTEL is to solicit and capture the requirements from the stakeholders (including national authorities responsible for provisioning emergency communications, end users, the EC, communications service providers, network operators, manufacturers and other interested parties) and coordinate the ETSI positions on emergency communications-related issues. ETSI SC EMTEL has produced several documents with requirements for emergency communications between individuals and authorities/organizations, between authorities/organizations, from authorities/organizations to the individuals and among individuals (e.g. [3]). ETSI SC EMTEL maintains a report [38] with the European regulatory texts and orientations applicable for the emergency communications (such as EC directives, commission decisions) and other information or references such as generally applicable regulatory principles.

Other central contributions from ETSI in the field of PPDR communications are the TETRA and DMR standards, both briefly described in previous Section 1.4.3. In addition to these PMR standards, ETSI is also active in emergency calling systems, GMDSS and satellite emergency communications. ETSI is currently working in a number of EC mandates that are linked to PPDR from different angles: Mandate M/284 related to the maintenance of the ETSI harmonized standards in the field of private/professional LMR systems and equipment; Mandate M/493 related to the support of the location-enhanced emergency call service; Mandate M/496 related to the development of standardization regarding space industry; and Mandate M/512 on Reconfigurable Radio System (RRS) related to the development and use of RRS technologies in Europe. Within this latter, there is Objective C that proposes to explore potential areas of synergy among commercial, civil security and military applications in terms of network interfaces and architectures for dynamic use of spectrum resources and of architectures and interfaces for reconfigurable mobile devices for commercial and civil security applications. Also recently, the technical committee (TC), in charge of the TETRA specifications, evolved into the now called TETRA and Critical Communications Evolution (TCCE), which is the TC with responsibility for the provision of user-driven standards for PPDR communications over both BB and NB AIs. Outside ETSI, TC TCCE close cooperates with the TETRA and TCCA, particularly with regard to the development of requirements, use cases and architectures for mission-critical communications standardization.

ETSI TC TCCE and TCCA, together with other relevant organizations such as the NIST from the United States, are working closely with the 3GPP to advance the LTE specifications to better support the needs of critical communications users. Indeed, the 3GPP body unites seven telecommunications SDOs from Asia, Europe and North America (ARIB, ATIS, CCSA, ETSI, TSDSI, TTA, TTC), known as ‘Organizational Partners’, together with market representatives and a huge number of companies within the telecom sector across the world to produce the reports and specifications that define the 3GPP technologies. In the context of PPDR communications, group call system enablers and off-network services are among the extensions being added to the LTE specifications. A new 3GPP working group (called SA6 – ‘mission-critical applications’) has been created for the development of applications for specialized communications. These extensions to the LTE standard are described in detail in Chapter 4.

As to radio spectrum matters, another key organization in Europe is the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT). CEPT, through its Electronic Communications Committee (ECC), brings together 48 countries to develop common policies and regulations in electronic communications and related applications for Europe. CEPT takes also an active role at the international level, preparing common European proposals to represent European interests in the ITU and other international organizations. Concerning PPDR communications, the band 380–385/390–395 MHz is so far the only harmonized band for permanent NB PPDR systems in Europe, as established in CEPT ECC Decision (08)05. Indeed, the introduction of digital radiocommunication, the TETRA standard and the harmonized frequencies for the national emergency services were developed in response to the requirements of the Schengen Treaty obligations. Nowadays, Frequency Management Project Team 49 (FM PT49) within CEPT ECC is currently working on radio spectrum issues concerning PPDR applications and scenarios, in particular concerning the BB high-speed communications as requested by PPDR organizations. FM PT49 is intended to identify and evaluate suitable bands for European-wide harmonization of spectrum (both below and above 1 GHz), by taking into account cross-border communication issues and PPDR application requirements. A further insight into the CEPT and other European bodies’ activities concerning PPDR BB spectrum is addressed in Chapter 6.

In this context, a few European countries have already established the path to follow to eventually offer critical voice and BB data for their PPDR agencies. Notoriously, the UK Home Office has initiated the procurement process that is expected to lead to the replacement of its current NB TETRA system (called Airwave) for a new system, known as the Emergency Services Network (ESN), which will make use of 4G/LTE technology. Further details on this UK program, together with other proposals and initiatives towards the delivery of mobile BB PPDR across Europe (France, Finland, Belgium), are covered under Chapter 3.