Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Nextel crippling Denver's police radios Radical solution eyed to end interference

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 03:44:54 -0400

Nextel crippling Denver's police radios Radical solution eyed to end interference

By John Ingold
Denver Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - Cellphone proliferation is making it nearly impossible
for Denver police to communicate with
their departments and each other in some areas of the city.

At least six areas, each spanning several blocks, exist where police officers'
radios simply do not work. The department has
struggled with the problem for the past several years; at one point, at least 24
radio dead spots existed.

Officers now cannot call dispatchers to relay information from those six areas.
They cannot hear calls from colleagues. Of
more concern is the fact they cannot send out emergency signals when they are in
trouble.

Having a police radio is those areas is "like carrying a brick," says Dana Hansen,
the commander of the department's
Electronic Engineering Bureau.

The problem is that signals from cellphone transmitters overpower the signal to
officers' radios. Many of the dead spots are in
high traffic areas, where officers need radios most.

Departments across the nation struggle with the issue as cellular-phone companies
install more transmitter sites to boost
coverage.

But Denver's solution to the problem at the six dead spots - an ambitious
reshuffling of the radio spectrum - could make the
city a prototype for how to solve the problem nationally.

Cellular-phone companies and public-safety agencies both use spectrum space in the
800-megahertz band. In some cases
their portions of the spectrum run up against each other and signals even overlap
a little, said Denver police Division Chief
Steve Cooper.

Everybody is playing within the rules in the frequency competition. But when
officers are near a cell tower and far from their
own tower, police radios lose.

The Federal Communications Commission has received reports from across the country
of hundreds of such cases of
interference.

"What's reported is just the tip of the iceberg, and the potential interference
out there is much more extensive," said Robert
Gurss, the director of legal and government affairs for the Association of Public
Safety Communications Officials, a nonprofit
group that closely follows the interference problem. "And we think it's going to
get worse because the cellular companies are
increasing their number of cell sites and the police need to expand their networks
as well."

In the metro area, Denver appears to have had the most problems with interference,
though other police departments, such as
Lakewood, have experienced trouble as well, but some suburban departments report
no difficulties.

For police, interference is more than just an inconvenience. While no tragedies
have resulted from interference, the problem
has affected Denver police in several dangerous situations.

One of those was in June 2001. Officers began chasing after a man who had fired
shots at two people in the 1400 block of
Xenia Street. The officers tried to radio for help but were in a dead spot and
couldn't get a signal.

They chased the man for nearly two blocks before they were out of the
no-communications area and could talk with
dispatchers. They eventually caught the man without incident.

Cooper is haunted by what could have happened.

"The point is all of that could have been going on and no one would have heard
it," Cooper said.

Every Denver patrol car has a cellphone assigned to it, Cooper said. But in an
emergency, the phones are not as reliable as a
radio.

In a speech two weeks ago, FCC Chairman Michael Powell said it is one of his top
priorities to resolve the interference
problem.

"This may be one of the most challenging spectrum policy proceedings that will
come before this commission," he said.

In early 2002, the FCC began proceedings to find a solution to the problem. Since
then, two main plans have emerged.

One, dubbed the "Balanced Approach" by those who support it, states that all
identified instances of interference should be
fixed quickly, through technical and mechanical modifications.

"There are small modifications that can be done to specific radio systems that
aren't costly and aren't time consuming," said
Mark Gedris, the communications manager for the United Telecom Council, a major
backer of the Balanced Approach. "It's
about finding a solution for each individual interference problem."

Several large companies, including AT&T Wireless Services, and cities, including
Colorado Springs, have signed on to the
Balanced Approach, Gedris said.

It has its detractors, too.

"From a public-safety standpoint, we have to solve interference before you find
it," said Alan Tilles, a Washington,
D.C.-based communications attorney representing several parties, including Denver,
in the interference debate. "We have to
be proactive. Reactive fixes put officers' and firemen's lives in danger."

Denver already has undertaken something of a Balanced Approach. About two years
ago, when Denver police began
working on the interference problem, there were 24 dead spots identified.

Officials began working with Nextel Communications Inc. to fix some of those
sites. Nationwide, Nextel's band frequencies
fall closest to emergency radio systems and are most frequently involved in
interference. The Denver Police Department's
cellphones are also, ironically, Nextel phones, though Cooper said there is no
connection between Denver's phone choice and
Nextel's help in fixing interference.

Crews installed filters to block out the part of the Nextel signal that overlaps
Denver's. They made other changes in transmitter
power.

Even so, the city was left with at least six dead spots. And that has caused
Denver to look for other, more controversial
solutions.

"Wireless carriers keep installing cell sites," Cooper said. "You go around and
remediate all the Nextel cell sites. But what
happens when XYZ comes into town and wants to put in their cell sites?

"The only real answer in my mind is to realign the frequencies."

That idea is what is known as the Consensus Plan, and it proposes a massive shift
in the radio world. Under the plan,
public-safety agencies would have all their frequencies moved to the bottom of the
800-megahertz band. Cellphone
companies and others would occupy the rest, far enough away from the safety
agencies to not cause interference.

If the Consensus Plan is adopted, agencies across the country would have to
reprogram their radios. Some would have to buy
new equipment. Nextel has pledged nearly $1 billion to cover the costs, but United
Telecom Council's Gedris doesn't think
that will be enough to offset the cost to the companies that have to move their
radio spectrums.

"To move people would be a millions-upon-millions expense for each company," he
said. "Our thing is, instead of forcing
people out, let's all try to find a way to stay in there and avoid the
interference."

In Denver, officials have already negotiated with Nextel for a limited Consensus
Plan. Denver and Nextel would swap
frequencies so that Denver could have a continuous block, away from Nextel's
frequencies, Cooper said.

He wouldn't discuss what it would cost or who would pick up the bill. He said it
would involve Denver having to reprogram all
of its handheld radios, as well as its transmission tower. The department also
would have to buy some new equipment.

All that's left is the FCC's go-ahead.

"Denver is the only city I'm aware of that has worked with Nextel to get this
done. So I believe the FCC is looking for what is
going to happen in Denver," Cooper said.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~1591346,00.html#

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/61FxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/