# Presentation: 169076

## Objective 2— 
Facilitate a modernized and improved spectrum management system 

- Facilitate a modernized and improved spectrum management system

*Spectrum Management Process*

- National Forum on Public SafetySpectrum Management

**Notes:**
Review, analysis, and potential improvements to spectrum management processes.

## Introduction

- Objective 2— Spectrum Management Process

- The Commerce Advisory Group (CAG) is responsible for producing a report focusing on state and local public safety and commercial spectrum issues related to the President’s four objectives
- This session will help develop input on how public safety entities manage spectrum and frequency assignment process that the Department of Commerce will incorporate into the report
- Specifically, the group is asked to help develop a means to facilitate a modernized and improved spectrum management system
- This group will discuss and comment on figures outlining perceived processes used in assigning and managing spectral resources

*Spectrum Management Process*

## Meeting Ground Rules

- Objective 2— Spectrum Management Process

- The primary goal of the breakout session is to generate discussion
- Debate should focus on ideas posed, not the individual providing the input
- Open and candid discussion is encouraged
- Participants must use available microphones, stating their name and organization they represent EACH TIME they contribute to the discussion.
- Discussions will be non-attributable.  All information gathered will be presented in the aggregate.  No individual or agency will be mentioned in conjunction with a specific suggested improvement or opinion

*Spectrum Management Process*

**Notes:**
The intent is to gather information during each session via audiotapes, which will be used in evaluating and gathering input for the final 	report; however, participants should be assured that specific comments will be anonymously compiled in the aggregate.
Strongly encourage all participants to contribute their opinions to the important topics and issues explored by the Presidential Memorandum in the afternoon session of the second day through the use of a wireless polling device.
Stress the importance to participants using available microphones and stating their name and organization they represent EACH TIME they contribute to the discussion.
Advise participants that figures used in subsequent slides are designed to diagram the perceived process for each stage and to open these processes to:
Criticism; 
Corrections; and 
Recommendations relative to potential improvements.  
This technique emphasizes the importance of participant feedback and discussion.  

## Preliminary Key Findings

*Spectrum Management Process*

- The current FCC Rules do not always reflect the reality of the coordination process in the field.  Geography, in particular, requires different decision models and considerations than are delineated in the Rules
- The regulatory bodies should ensure a complete understanding of the licensing process by the users and coordinators.  In addition, more responsibility might be delegated to the coordinators
- The rulemaking process seems to be unnecessarily protracted.  The regulatory bodies may be too concerned with perfecting the rule, often missing the effective window of opportunity
- State and local public safety agency representatives acknowledged that the current spectrum management system could be improved, but that combining the authority of the NTIA and the FCC was not a viable solution

***Preliminary Key Findings***

**Notes:**
The November 12 meeting of public safety communications leaders produced a set of key findings shown on this slide
The following discussion will most likely touch on these topics among others

## Objective 2— Spectrum Management Process

- Does this figure require any significant changes?
- What parts of this process work well?
- What parts do not work well?
- How can this process be improved?
- What best practices exist in the overall spectrum management process?

*Spectrum Management Process*

**Notes:**
The figure on the slide illustrates a high-level view from the state and local public safety agency perspective.  
Specifically, the figure documents the processes associated with the three parts of state and local public safety spectrum management: spectrum allocation, frequency assignment, and frequency administration.  
Subsequent slides provide a brief overview of the federal public safety spectrum management process to provide a context for discussing the viability of combining the local, state, and federal spectrum management functions under a single agency. 
If discussion lags, consider asking the following questions to prompt further input:
Agree or Disagree: The spectrum management process is a complicated and layered process that varies among different user communities. 
To what degree does the ITU allocation process impact your organization?
Given the multilayered process, to what extent do the user needs remain accurate by the time allocations are issued?

## Objective 2— Spectrum Management Process

- Does this figure require any significant changes?
- What parts of this process work well?
- What parts do not work well?
- How can this process be improved?
- What best practices exist within the user activities of the spectrum management process?

*Spectrum Management Process*

**Notes:**
Ask participants to look at the diagram on this slide and walk them through an illustrative example such as the following:
“The Noel Police Department has recently decided to expand its current radio system.  To accommodate the new users, it will need to add two additional UHF channels.  The Noel Police Department has prepared its FCC Form 601 and required frequency coordinator forms.  It then submitted its completed application to the appropriate frequency coordinator. In this situation, does the process outlined above accurately reflect the steps Noel should take?”
If discussion lags, consider asking the following questions to prompt further input:
Agree or Disagree: An iterative process should exist between users and the Regional Planning Coordinators when planning use of channels in the 700 MHz band and the 800 MHz National Public Safety Planning Advisory Committee channels.
Does anyone or anything interject and amend the user’s stated requirements after the user submits its application?
To what extent does the process outlined within this slide reject and request additional information from applicants?

## Objective 2— Spectrum Management Process

- Does this figure require any significant changes?
- What parts of this process work well?
- What parts do not work well?
- How can this process be improved?
- What best practices exist within these frequency coordinator activities?

*Spectrum Management Process*

**Notes:**
Ask participants to look at the diagram on this slide and walk them through an illustrative example such as the following:
“The National Office of the frequency coordinator has received the Noel Police Department’s application.  After an initial review, the application is entered into National Office’s database.  The application is then sent to the regional office for frequency review and regional coordination.  The available frequencies are identified and preliminarily assigned to the Noel Fire Department.  The frequency coordinator then submits the entire application package to the FCC. In this situation, does the process outlined above accurately reflect the steps Noel should take?”

If discussion lags, consider asking the following questions to prompt further input:
Agree or Disagree: The current FCC Rules do not always reflect the reality of the coordination process in the field.  Geography, in particular, requires different decision models and considerations than are delineated in the Rules. 
Agree or Disagree: The FCC should consider delegating more responsibility to the coordinators. 
Agree or Disagree: Engineering, field-testing, and coordination occurs only at the local or agency level. 

## Objective 2— Spectrum Management Process

- Does this figure require any significant changes?
- What parts of this process work well?
- What parts do not work well?
- How can this process be improved?

*Spectrum Management Process*

**Notes:**
Ask participants to look at the diagram on this slide and walk them through an illustrative example such as the following:
“The application is received by the FCC database and automatically checked by ALMAPS.  This automatic check ensures that there are no undetected problems with the application.  After the application has passed the ALMAPS check, a FCC Examiner reviews it.  The application is either granted or denied, and the license is mailed to the Noel Fire Department.  In this situation, does the process outlined above accurately reflect the steps Noel should take?”

If discussion lags, consider asking the following questions to prompt further input:
Agree or Disagree: The internal FCC rulemaking process seems to be unnecessarily protracted.  If so, why might this be?
Agree or Disagree: The open, public rulemaking process is usually supported and recognized as being necessary for the development of public safety spectrum policy. 

## Objective 2— Spectrum Management Process

- During the November 12 meeting, the majority of participants did not support the combination of public safety spectrum management into a single entity

*Spectrum Management Process*

**Notes:**
A Single Public Safety Frequency Management Process? 

The figure on the slide illustrates the overall frequency management process for both federal public safety agencies and state and local public safety agencies.  Since the processes are similar, there is debate whether all public safety could be managed by a single entity.

The following questions should be considered:
Should there be a single entity?
Why or why not?
Possible benefits?
Possible drawbacks?
Who should be the managing entity?
What considerations should be made for state and local public safety?