RadioResource August 2014 TM

COMMUNICATIONS

developing a partnership that has lasted 25 years. What began in 1989 is now known as Project 25 (P25), a suc- Years of cessful suite of standards for interoper- able digital voice communications. The initial goals seemed intuitive, 25 and the technology leaders believed it Project 25 would be a process that would last four or five years, but the process quickly turned out to be quite complex. The five initial principles of P25 were: 1. Interoperability Since its inception in 1989, the Project 25 2. Spectral efficiency (P25) standard has become the most heavily 3. Competition in system life-cycle procurements used digital technology by U.S. public-safety 4. Graceful migration (backward officials. By James Downes and George Crouch and forward) 5. User-friendly equipment On a warm day in October 1989, the oping the capability to provide addi- top technology experts from federal, tional procurement sources for radio The framework for the standardiza- Ostate and local government agencies systems and provide interoperability, tion of digital public-safety communi- and organizations met in a conference especially for statewide public-safety cations was developed at this initial room in the Herbert Hoover Building and public-service systems. In a meeting. As a user-driven effort, at the U.S. Department of Commerce parallel effort, a federal government standards would be based on user re- for the “Advanced Technology Semi- committee had been working to stan- quirements, rather than what current nar” to address the future of public- dardize technology for technology could provide. As the effort safety communications technology. federal agencies. progressed, the manufacturing indus- Little did they know how much of an A major concern was that digital try, through the Telecommunications impact they would have on public- trunked technology be standardized to Industry Association (TIA), became a safety communications for the next 25 allow for interoperability among sys- key partner, providing necessary tech- years and for the foreseeable future. tems provided by different vendors. nical knowledge. At that time, technol- This concern was exemplified in the ogy was just beginning to advance into 1980s when two major vendors pro- The Early Years the digital world. Cellular phones were vided incompatible digital technolo- Organizing partnerships was a key still analog and LMR technology for gies, although both solutions were element in the early years of P25. After business and government had been compliant with the published encryp- all, this was the first public safety user- thrust into the digital world without tion standards. driven LMR communications stan- much thought about standards. The As- The common goal of all partici- dards effort. The original partnership sociation of Public-Safety Communi- pants in the initial 1989 meeting was to was formally organized into a Steering cations Officials (APCO) International provide an organized means for public- Committee. The Project 25 Steering was determined to enhance safety communications to migrate Committee was composed of three its APCO Project 16A trunking from analog technology to a digital representatives from APCO, three rep- recommendations that only described conventional and trunked environment. resentatives from NASTD, and three functional requirements to include Some manufacturers were already pro- representatives from federal govern- cross-manufacturer interoperability ducing digital radio systems that were ment agencies (FED): one each from through the development of a detailed not interoperable. If that trend were to the National Communications System technical standards suite. Another or- continue, many of the goals of this first (NCS), the ganization, the National Association of meeting could not be realized. The re- (NSA) and the National Telecommuni- State Telecommunications Directors sults were promising as the partici- cations and Information Administra- (NASTD) was also interested in devel- pants agreed to continue to meet, tion (NTIA). APCO and NASTD each

Reprinted from April 2014 MissionCritical Communications • MCCmag.com P25

provided an additional representative tatives, had detailed how the public- views and approves the standards as to serve as co-chairs of the Steering safety user community could work P25-endorsed documents. Committee. A number of meetings with the communications industry to The MoU defined the P25 standard were held during the next several develop the suite of P25 standards. The as a cooperative effort between the months to further define the project. As effort was organized into the following users (APCO/NASTD/FED) and in- in the first meeting, the manufacturing committees and subcommittees to dustry (TIA). It specified how the stan- community was interested in assisting manage and staff the effort: dards were developed from the Steering Committee with technical n The P25 Steering Committee: Re- user-defined requirements, as well as standards development. sponsible for managing the process, the relationship between the user com- The P25 Steering Committee providing leadership and guidance. munity and industry. It also addressed worked closely with public-safety n The User Needs Subcommittee the important aspects of intellectual users and the manufacturing commu- (UNS): Responsible for developing property (IP) rights essential to the de- nity for the next several years to de- user requirements. velopment and adoption of an effective velop a process and a validation n The APCO Project 25 Interface standard. A supplemental MoU in 1993 method for creation of the required Committee (APIC): Tasked with devel- further clarified processes and proce- standards. Although the Steering Com- oping collaborative recommended dures. After the MoU was signed, the mittee and its subcommittees were standards by working with users and P25 Steering Committee realized the staffed by well-qualified and compe- manufacturers. project should be broken down into tent leaders and technologists, it n TIA 2 TR-8 Private Radio Engi- multiple parts to best address the user quickly became evident that a formal neering Committee: Tasked with pub- requirements. The committee created a partnership with the communications lishing the collaborative standards multi-phased approach focused on industry would be beneficial to ensure documents as P25 and American Na- baseline standards first, followed by the success of the effort. In these early tional Standards Institute (ANSI) stan- advanced features. days, the partnership was formalized in dards. a memorandum of understanding Phase 1 (MoU) called APCO Project 25 or These committees were made up of The initial phase focused on the APCO/NASTD/FED Project 25. a number of subcommittees and task Common Air Interface (CAI) and About 10 years into the project, the and work groups that addressed spe- voice encoder-decoder (vocoder) as its name was shortened to Project 25, in cific subjects, as required. baseline, to be followed by advanced recognition that the project had in- In April 1992, an MoU was signed features and wireline interfaces. Phase creased in magnitude significantly be- between the co-chairs of the P25 Steer- 1 of the P25 standard defined the first yond just APCO. ing Committee, the respective presi- step toward providing a standardized dents of APCO and NASTD, and TIA. digital LMR technology. Phase 1 in- The MoU The MoU formalized the process and cluded the specifications for 12.5-kilo- By 1992, the P25 Steering Commit- procedures for the development and hertz FDMA equipment and systems tee participants, in coordination with publication of a series of TIA-102 stan- that could interoperate with multiple other user and manufacturing represen- dards. The P25 Steering Committee re- vendors’ radios in conventional or

Committees and subcommittees established

1989 1992 1995

First meeting Phase 1 Common about a common Air Interface (CAI) digital standard standard completed P25

trunked mode, as well as legacy analog ciency. Although the need was identi- cluded in the P25 suite of standards FM radio systems. fied for standards to address additional that have been approved by the P25 Although the core of the Phase 1 interfaces and testing procedures, the Steering Committee. These documents standard is the CAI that defines how primary focus for the Phase 2 suite of include specifications and standards the basic radio operates over the air standards was defined by a two-slot for the applicable features and inter- and provides the basis of interoperabil- TDMA approach to spectrum effi- faces, as well as almost 30 documents ity, the initial task was the selection of ciency as opposed to a 6.25-kilohertz addressing specific test procedures. the vocoder. Following the approval FDMA technology. and publishing of the vocoder specifi- The Phase 2 suite of standards ad- P25 Compliance cations, the CAI standard was com- dressing TDMA trunking technology Assessment Program pleted in 1995. Since then, additional was completed and published in 2012, Both the user and manufacturing Phase 1 standards have been developed but the standards allowing initial communities identified a need to estab- to address trunking; security services, product development were published lish procedures to confirm that P25 including and over-the-air- in 2010. Work continues on P25 to ad- equipment and systems were compli- rekeying (OTAR); network manage- dress revisions and updates to the ex- ant with the published standards. This ment and telephone interfaces; and the isting standards, based on technology led to the development of the P25 data network interface. Additionally, upgrades and to develop the necessary Compliance Assessment Program there have been ongoing maintenance test procedures to confirm standards (CAP), a voluntary program that al- revisions and updates to the existing compliance. lows suppliers of P25 equipment to standards. A significant number of standards demonstrate that their respective prod- The P25 Steering Committee an- documents addressing the P25 Inter- ucts are compliant with P25 baseline nounced the completion of the Phase 1 RF Subsystem Interface (ISSI) have requirements reflected in the suite of standards in August 1995. P25 Phase 1 been developed and published. There standards. The program, developed by systems are now commonplace, en- are a number of public-safety agen- the Department of Homeland Security abling interoperability, competition cies implementing or planning to im- (DHS) and the National Institute of among manufacturers, backward com- plement the P25 ISSI to interconnect Standards and Technology (NIST), patibility and spectrum efficiency to P25 systems. The standards for the provides the user community assur- fulfill the original goals of the effort. Conventional Fixed Station Interface ance that the communications equip- (CFSI) and Console Subsystem Inter- ment they are implementing meets the Phase 2 face (CSSI) have also been completed standards for performance, confor- Phase 2 was designed to satisfy and successfully deployed. Addition- mance and interoperability. The charter how public safety’s need to transition ally, standards have been developed for the P25 CAP was executed in April to a 6.25-kilohertz or equivalent occu- and published to address a number of 2008, and eight laboratories were ac- pied channel bandwidth and maintain interfaces relevant to security serv- credited to conduct performance and backward compatibility to Phase 1 ices, to include the Inter-Key Manage- interoperability tests relevant to the technology, allowing for graceful mi- ment Facility Interface (IKI). P25 Phase 1 CAI. gration toward greater spectrum effi- More than 94 documents are in- The user community has repeatedly

Phase 2 P25 Compliance TDMA Assessment trunking Program (CAP) standards charter executed published

2008 2010 2012 2014

First commercial P25 radio ISSI tests in Dallas programming spreadsheet published P25

The P25 Organization and Process ments to maintain the relevancy of ex- isting standards. TIA Standards P25 continues to evolve to meet TIA Policy Users Development public-safety communications require- TR-8 Land Mobile ments, to include interfaces and inter- Private Radio Section Project 25 Steering Committee Radio Standards connections to broadband technology. Broadband may be the wave of the fu- TR-8.x APIC User Needs Subcommittee ture, but P25 is the rock public safety depends on for solid, reliable and se- • Approved SDO • Interface between • Develops the user • Develops users and the requirements cure public-safety digital communica- technical technical • Provides user tions. Let’s celebrate P25’s success and standards development input look to the future. n • Follows TIA • May draft • Follows the P25 engineering proposed Steering manual standards Committee bylaws • Voting by • Follows APIC • Open to users James Downes is a telecommunications membership only guidelines manager with the Department of Homeland • Open to anyone Security (DHS) Office of Emergency Com- munications (OEC). Prior to moving to DHS emphasized the need for expanded spectrum-efficient systems and radios in 2003, he was the deputy director of the P25 CAP testing. DHS is working that are necessary to support our na- Management Office in the Depart- with industry and users to identify the tion’s public-safety communications ment of the Treasury. He has worked for required procedures to validate com- requirements. more than 40 years in wireless communica- pliance with Phase 2 equipment and As Phase 2 systems are developed tions, primarily in the public safety and fed- systems, particularly for TDMA oper- and deployed, the P25 Steering Com- eral law enforcement environments. He has ation and the ISSI. In the meantime, mittee continues to work closely with been involved in the Project 25 standards users are encouraged to seriously con- the user community and industry to ad- activity since 1994, representing the federal sider the existing tests that are in- dress the future of LMR. Without a government user community and has been cluded in the P25 suite of standards doubt, LMR will be prominent in pub- a voting member of the Project 25 Steering for interim compliance testing and lic-safety voice communications for Committee since 1996. In 2011, he was validation. years to come. elected chair of the Steering Committee. He The Future When Will P25 also represents DHS OEC in the Telecom- munications Industry Association (TIA) TR- There is no doubt that P25 is a suc- Be Completed? 8 standards development activities and was cess. P25 has met or exceeded its origi- Some officials have asked when the chair of the Project 25 Technology Inter- nal goals of spectrum efficiency, P25 standards development will be fin- est Group (PTIG) for more than four years. backward compatibility, competition, ished. P25 is a “living” standards ef- and perhaps most importantly, interop- fort, which has continued to evolve erability. Furthermore, P25 is the pre- alongside technology and user require- George Crouch is vice chair of the P25 dominant public-safety technology in ments. Therefore, the standards will Steering Committee and serves as one of the U.S. and is accepted as a primary continue to evolve. An example of this the National Association of State Technol- public-safety standard in 83 countries evolution is the recent realization by ogy Directors (NASTD) representatives on worldwide. According to the Project 25 the vendors and users that a standard the committee. Crouch is the administrator Technology Interest Group (PTIG), 38 for Link Layer Encryption and Authen- for South Carolina’s statewide radio sys- vendors provide P25 systems and serv- tication supports a more robust security tem, Palmetto 800. He is also a member of ices available in all public-safety fre- capability. A spreadsheet to import and the Association of Public-Safety Communi- quency bands with the exception of export Project 25 (P25) programming cations Officials (APCO) International and VHF low band. P25 has been selected data was also published in April. past state chapter president and Federal by most U.S. federal agencies as their Most standards development bod- Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) choice for interoperability, reliability ies, including ANSI and TIA, stress Region IV Regional Emergency Communi- and security. End users have realized that “a completed standard is a dead cations Coordination Working Groups that implementing P25 standards-based standard,” emphasizing the need to (RECCWG) past vice chair. Email com- products results in cost effective and continually add technology enhance- ments to [email protected].

RadioResource MissionCritical Communications delivers wireless voice and data solutions for mobile and remote mission-critical operations. Editorial content targets organizations in the United States and Canada with mobile and remote communications needs, including public safety, government, transportation, manufacturing, utility/energy, business, and industrial entities. The magazine covers industry news; case studies; innovative applications; product information; emerging technologies; industry reports and trends; and technical tips. In addition, each issue contains Public Safety Technology, a special section devoted solely to the needs of the public-safety community. RadioResource MissionCritical Communications is published by RadioResource Media Group. Pandata Corp., 7108 S. Alton Way, Building H, Centennial, CO 80112, Tel: 303-792-2390, Fax: 303-792-2391, www.RRMediaGroup.com. Copyright 2014 Pandata Corp. All rights reserved. Reprinted from the August 2014 issue of RadioResource MissionCritical Communications. For subscription or advertising information please call 303-792-2390 or visit www.RRMediaGroup.com.

Reprinted from August 2014 MissionCritical Communications • MCCmag.com