1

Next Generation 9‐1‐1 Wisconsin UpdateWLIC  MEETING  ‐ MAY  2018

May‐18

History of 9‐1‐1 in Wisconsin• 1989: Milwaukee County was the first county to implement E9-1-1

• 2016: Iron County was the last County to implement E9-1-1

• 2003: Wisconsin legislature implemented a supplementalwireless surcharge to reimburse wireless service providers andcounties for their costs to implement wireless E9-1-1 service.

• 2008: The wireless surcharge was discontinued in 2008 and thewireless E9-1-1 program expired on April 1, 2009. Although thesurcharge was temporary, the greatest progress in wirelessdeployment occurred during these years.

**Source: Wisconsin State Interoperability Council, Wisconsin Statewide NG 9-1-1 Plan, May 11, 2017

May‐18

2

Current Funding for 9‐1‐1 Service In Wisconsin

• Wisconsin does not have statewide funding for E 9-1-1 service as itexists today

• There are two statutorily-imposed fees in place to fund local E 9-1-1,but neither fee is collected directly by local government

• The first is a landline 9-1-1 fee (up to 40 cents per line). Landlineproviders both collect and keep the funds as reimbursement.

• The second surcharge is 75 cents per line for landline, wireless & VoIP.

• In addition, pre-paid wireless service is charged 38 cents/transactioneach time a customer purchases a pre-paid phone or pre-paid minutes.

• Both of the above are known as the Police and Fire Protection Fee andis not available to emergency service providers or telecommunicationsproviders. It is deposited in the state’s general fund and used as sharedrevenue payments for municipalities

**Source: Wisconsin State Interoperability Council, Wisconsin Statewide NG 9-1-1 Plan, May 11, 2017

May‐18

Current PSAP Integration in Wisconsin

• Most PSAPs in Wisconsin function independently of each other

• There is limited integration of E 9-1-1with other public safety systems suchas CAD & RMS

• PSAPS not served by the same Selective Router are not able to transfer 9-1-1 calls without losing the caller’s location and other premise information.

• It is very costly and/or difficult for individual PSAPs to coordinate with allthe telecom carriers in order to aggregate calls digitally into the PSAP.

• There is a need for statewide coordination in relation to NG 9-1-1 planningand implementation.

**Source: Wisconsin State Interoperability Council, Wisconsin Statewide NG 9-1-1 Plan, May 11, 2017

May‐18

3

What is NG9‐1‐1?• Internet Protocol (IP)

• Also supports texts, photos,video

• Works with any connecteddevice

• Interoperable at county,region, state and federal

ESInet

Policies, Standards

GIS Data

Funding

Current Status of NG 9‐1‐1 In Wisconsin

• October 2017 Office of Emergency Communication (OEC)created at DMA and the 9‐1‐1 program is within this office

• Act 59 created a statutorily appointed 9‐1‐1Subcommittee

• Act 59 appropriate $6.7 Million/year for buildout andsustaining an ESInet network

May‐18

4

NG9‐1‐1 Subcommittee• The 2017-2019 biennial budget created a Gubernatorial

appointed 9-1-1 Subcommittee under the InteroperabilityCouncil

• 19 members from both private and public sector

• Reports to the State Interoperability Council

• Duties include but not limited to:

1. Advise DMA on NG 9-1-1 ESInet contracts

2. Advise DMA on statewide efforts necessary to transition to NG 9-1-1

3. Recommend to DMA federal sources of funding & sustainable funding streams topurchase and maintain NG9-1-1 equipment

4. Advise DMA on criteria for administering grants for NG 9-1-1 equipment & training

5. Conduct a 9-1-1 telecommunications system assessment

May‐18

What Can ESInet Do?• Allows connectivity between 9-1-1 centers facilitating easy call

transfer & records sharing

• Offers a high level of redundancy & resiliency

• Will continue to operate (deliver 9-1-1 calls) even if circuits are nolonger functioning

• Offers wide bandwidth allowing for transfer of video, pictures,graphics, telematics, etc. which current analog circuits inWisconsin cannot provide.

• Delivers text-to-9-1-1 reliably as a high priority especially for thosewho are deaf or hard of hearing

• Provides accurate, reliable and timely location information fortelecommunicators and first responders, especially for wirelesscalls.

May‐18

5

The Future of ESInet in Wisconsin

• $6.7 Million appropriated in the 2018-2019 budget for buildoutof the ESInet

• Statewide 9-1-1 assessment will be conducted first withconsultation from the 9-1-1 Subcommittee

• RFP will be prepared

• Bid accepted

• Contract awarded

• Unknown how long it will take to buildout the network

May‐18

ESInet Costs• $0.18 per capita per month

• Due to the high cost a statewide ESInet approach is suggested

• A statewide ESInet would cost about $12.5 Million/Year to buildand maintain

• Implementation of Statewide ESInet is imperative as PSAPequipment is becoming obsolete

Source: NG9-1-1 Wisconsin Workgroup, Whitepaper: The Need for 9-1-1 Modernization in WI, September 2016

May‐18

6

GIS Costs• $0 currently allocated toward building outstatewide layers

• Currently developing a budget

• Considerations:• Local government buildout and maintenance

• State government buildout and maintenance

• Role of private sector

• How many years?

May‐18

Current land linecall processing

May‐18

Phone Number

Automatic Number Identification (ANI)

Add Street Address

Automatic Location Identifier (ALI)

Add Emergency Service Zone

Master Street Address Guide (MSAG)

Look up Police, Fire, EMS

Emergency Service ProviderLookup Table

7

GIS Data Layers in a NG9‐1‐1• REQUIRED GIS data layers:

o Road Centerlines

o PSAP Boundary

o Emergency Service Boundary (must include separate layers forLaw, Fire, and Emergency Medical Service)

o Site/Structure Address Points

• Absolutely necessary for:o Location Validation Function (LVF)

o Emergency Call Routing Function (ECRF)

o Call taking

o Dispatch operations

May‐18

GIS Data Layers in a NG9‐1‐1• STRONGLY RECOMMENDED GIS data layers:

o Street Name Alias Table

o Landmark Name Part Table

o Complete Landmark Name Alias Table

o States or Equivalents

o Counties or Equivalents

o Incorporated Municipality Boundary

o Unincorporated Community Boundary

o Neighborhood Community Boundary

o Other Emergency Service Boundaries (e.g. Poison Control, Forest Service,Coast Guard, Animal Control, etc.)

• May assist or improve the functionality of the LVF and ECRF

• Extremely beneficial for call taking and dispatch operations

May‐18

8

GIS Data Layers in a NG9‐1‐1• Other RECOMMENDED GIS data layers:

o Railroad Centerlines

o Hydrology Line

o Hydrology Polygon

o Cell Site Location

o Mile Marker Location

o Orthophotos

• Very useful for NG9-1-1 and E9-1-1 call taking anddispatch operations

May‐18

Call Routing in NG9‐1‐1

May‐18

Address Range100 ‐140 Main Street

Access Point

Site Structure Address Point

PSAP Boundary

Caller Location

Address Range100 ‐140 Main Street

Access Point

Site Structure Address Point

PSAP Boundary

Caller Location

9

Address Point Considerations• Complex property sites

• Multiple points per addressallowed

• Primary site address

• Sub‐address (e.g. apartment units)

• Commercial sites, schools, marinas manyother examples

• Stacked points vs. distributed

• Cost considerations

• Phase in approach

• About 6 million addresses andsub‐addresses in Wisconsin.

May‐18

Access Point

Site Landmark (e.g. Athletic Field)

Site Structure Centroid

Building Interior

Building Entry

GIS Data Standards• Required for NG9-1-1 to work

• NENA is developing standards for NG9-1-1 GIS Data• NENA-STA-010, NENA Detailed Functional and Interface Standards for

the NENA i3 Solution, Appendix B

• NENA-STA-006, NENA Standards for NG9-1-1 GIS Data Model

• Standards will:• Allow exchange of data with local, regional, state and federal agencies

• Allow interoperability

• Allows call transfers to anywhere

• WLIA task force

May‐18

10

Other NENA GIS‐Related Standards

• NENA‐STA‐004, United States Civic Location Data Exchange Format (CLDXF)Standard, for the representation of addresses

• NENA‐STA‐010, NENA Detailed Functional and Interface Standards for the NENA i3 Solution, Appendix B

• NENA‐STA‐005, NENA Standards for the Provisioning and Maintenance of GIS datato ECRF and LVFs

• NENA‐REQ‐002, NENA Next Generation 9‐1‐1 Data Management Requirements

• NENA‐INF‐14, NENA Information Document for Development of Site/StructureAddress Point GIS Data for 9‐1‐1

• NENA‐INF‐XXX, NENA Information Document for GIS Data Stewardship for NextGeneration 9‐1‐1 (NG9‐1‐1)

• NENA 02‐014, NENA GIS Data Collection and Maintenance Standards

• NENA 71‐501, NENA Information Document for Synchronizing Geographic Information System Databases with MSAG & ALI

May‐18 Source: NENA, NSGIC

Questions

May‐18