Working Group 3, subgroup tasked with the 3 rd topic: “Leveraging LBS and Emerging Location Technologies for Indoor Wireless E9-1-1” March 6, 2013 Stephen J. Wisely & Richard Craig, Co-Chairs Leveraging LBS Subgroup Co-Leaders Ryan JensenT-Mobile Wayne Ballantyne Motorola Mobility

Outdoor Accuracy Testing Indoor Accuracy Testing Impact of Commercial LBS Technologies 2 Work Group 3 Areas of Focus

3 Working Group 3: Name Description: Leveraging Commercial Location-Based Services “The Working Group shall explore and make recommendations on methodologies for leveraging commercial location-based services for location determination and provide recommendations on the feasibility or appropriateness for the Commission to adopt operational benchmarks that will allow consumers to evaluate carriers’ ability to provide accurate location information”

Participants 4 First NameLast NameOrganization BrettSchneiderBexar Metro Network District DeWayneSennettATIS NormanShawPolaris Wireless, Inc. SusanSherwoodVerizon Wireless GirishSivaramTeleCommunications Systems, Inc. (TSC) JohnSnappIntrado, Inc. DorothySpears-DeanVirginia Information Technologies Agency BillTortorielloUS Cellular GregTuretzkyCSR Technology Inc. BruceWilsonQualcomm Inc. StephenWiselyAPCO International Richard Deh- Min WuNokia Siemens Networks WG 3 Leveraging LBS & Emerging Location Technologies for Indoor Wireless E9-11 Subgroup consisted of the following members: First NameLast NameOrganization WayneBallantyneMotorola Mobility LLC AndrewBeckCommScope RichardCraigVerizon Wireless KhaledDessoukyTechnoCom Corporation ThomasDombrowskyWiley Rein LLP JeannaGreenSprint RogerHixsonNENA RyanJensenT-Mobile MarteKinderTime Warner Cable SandraLottCenturyLink MikeLoushineApplied Communication Sciences BarryMartinBoeing KathyMcMahonAPCO International MartinMoodyMetro Emergency Services Board GaryParsons NextNav LLC GaneshPattabiranan NextNav LLC GustavoPavonTrue Position, Inc. RaghavendhraRaoAT&T ChuckRonshagenCassidian Communications

Working Group 3, “Leveraging LBS” report - Work Completed  Final report covering:  Location Technologies now used only for LBS, but which may be adaptable for Indoor E9-1-1  Emerging Location Technologies that could possibly be used for Indoor E9-1-1  For each of these technologies, assessment of:  Accuracy and Time-to-First-Fix (TTFF)  Location yield  Network Impact  Handset Impact  Standards Implications  Database creation and maintenance issues 5

Working Group 3, “Leveraging LBS” report - Work Completed (cont.)  The following location technologies were analyzed:  WiFi-based Location  Metropolitan beacon  O-TDOA for LTE  RF Fingerprinting  Low-earth Orbit Satellite-based Positioning  Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS) Positioning  Assisted-GNSS  Hybrid Positioning using Multiple Location and Inertial Navigation Sensors  Role of the Test Bed  Only technologies that participated in the test bed had detailed parametric accuracy, yield, and TTFF claims shown in the Leveraging LBS report 6

Working Group 3, “Leveraging LBS” report – Summary & Next Steps  The diversity of location technologies reviewed in this report confirms that continual advances are being made in the field. Additionally, all the technologies discussed lend themselves to hybridization, i.e., the blending of measurements from multiple technologies to increase yield, and possibly accuracy. However, very few of these location technologies are currently available for E use indoors. Three location technologies participated in the Indoor Test Bed. Based on the results, the workgroup believes that good progress is being made in addressing the indoor location challenge; however, significantly more work needs to be done, including characterization of additional technologies in a Phase 2 test bed.  We recommend establishment of subsequent Test Bed trials to evaluate future technologies, such as WiFi, GLONASS, U-TDOA, and O-TDOA for LTE 7

Working Group 3, “Leveraging LBS” report - Project Timeline  Kick-off Meeting March Motorola Mobility, Plantation FL  Weekly Conference Calls in between all F2F meetings  June 2012 NextNav, Santa Clara, CA  Scope of report finalized  Technology assessment criteria agreed upon  August 2012 F2F at St. Paul MN Metropolitan Emergency Services Board  October 2012 F2F in Verizon HQ-DC  November 2012: Lockdown on new technologies to be reviewed  January 2013 F2F at Qualcomm Santa Clara  Essential agreement on final content  February 19: 100% completion of final report 8