tusa consulting services presentation to the city of west palm beach city commission

Tusa Consulting ServicesPresentation to

The City of West Palm BeachCity Commission

Tusa Consulting Services

Public Safety CommunicationsAnalysis and Report

Purpose: To provide a review of options for the City of West Palm Beach in consideration of the modernization of its public safety radio

system.

The City of West Palm Beach 11/19/2012

Presentation Roadmap

• Definitions• Harris Project-25 Proposal • Motorola Unsolicited Proposal• Palm Beach County Radio System Access• Competitive Procurement/ RFP• Rank of Alternatives• Questions


Definitions Project-25 (P-25) - A standard for the design and manufacture of

digital two-way radios intended to allow for the competitive procurement of radio equipment.

Competitive Procurement - The contractual acquisition of any kind of asset with appropriated funds, that enables all sources to compete in a fair and open environment. For example, an RFP will ensure the highest level of openness, maximizing the suitability of the requested assets or service, and the best return on investment (ROI).

Sole Source - A "Sole Source" purchase means that only one supplier, to the best of the requester's knowledge and belief is capable of delivering the required product or service. Similar types of goods and services may exist, but only one supplier, for reasons of expertise or compatibility with existing equipment is the only source that is acceptable to meet a specific need.


Current City Radio System Status

• Motorola SmartNet II, Proprietary-Analog

• Built in 1986 (26 years ago)

• Passed End-of-Life date (12/2001)

• Passed End-of-Support date (6/2009)


Current City Radio System Status

• Sixteen 800MHz Channels Owned by the City– Ten in use by WPB– Six in use by the MPSCC

• Mobile and Portable Radios– 256 P-25 capable portable radios– 53 P-25 capable mobile radios– 791 mobiles and portables that are NOT P-25

compatible


Harris OpenSky

• Initially designed by M/A-COM for non-public safety applications, but later enhanced/marketed to some public safety agencies

• Proprietary radio system, not an open-standard such as Project-25. Equipment available only from Harris

• 4-slot technology provides more channel efficiency, but requires ~6db higher signal level margins for coverage equivalency to P-25 and other technologies

• Inferior in-building performance when compared to Project-16 (analog) or Project-25 simulcast technology


Harris-MPSCC Proposal

• P-25 addition to MPSCC OpenSky System

• Upgrades to reliable/proven simulcast technology

• Configuration– Enhanced coverage reliability - four tower sites– Two simulcast transmit/receive sites and two receive-only sites

– Shares existing MPSCC OS Network Switch/Controller

• Requires additional radios to include all users


Harris-MPSCC Proposal

• Pros– Provides an open-standards P-25 radio system

– Increases operational 800MHz channels from 8 to 10

– Alleviates EOL and EOS issues for current system

– Allow for reuse of 309 Harris and Motorola radios

• Cons– Significant resource sharing and operational coordination

with the MPSCC

– Proposes additional maintenance costs in addition to the current Open Sky maintenance costs

– Decreases interoperability between City and County

– Extensive burden of site development placed on City


Motorola Proposal

• Unsolicited Proposal

• Includes three options for modernization– Option 1 – SmartX Migration – pathway to P-25

– Option 2 – Full upgrade to P-25 w/ PBC owned Astro25 Switch

– Option 3 – Full upgrade to P-25 w/ WPB owned Astro25 Switch

• No pricing provided for mobile or portable radios

• No pricing provided for system maintenance


Motorola Proposal

• Pros– Provides an open-standards P-25 radio system

– Increase operational 800MHz channels from 8 to 10

– Resolves EOL and EOS issues for current analog system

– Allow for reuse of 309 Harris and Motorola radios

• Cons– Procurement law precludes going forward with any option

offered in Motorola proposal

– No guaranteed coverage provided. Places City at serious risk with no accountability of system for Motorola

– No coverage testing or system performance verification

– Extensive burden of site development placed on City


Palm Beach County System

Hub Access AgencyCity interconnects to PBC switch – Retains existing City System

• Pros

– Phased migration pathway to P-25 due to shared City/County P-25 switch (P-25 would not be available until a later phase)

– All currently owned mobile and portable radios remain operational

– City would maintain control of radio management and operation (except for the PBC owned switch)

– Continued level of interoperable communications with County

• Cons

– Locks City into a sole-source procurement when the move to acquire P-25 equipment for each site is eventually made

– Requires current SmartNet system to remain operational until P-25

– City would be required to upgrade software in step with County


Palm Beach County System

Direct Access AgencyCity would be full user of County system – abandon existing system

• Pros

– Eliminates need of existing system replacement/ maintenance

– County would offer discount for use of WPB 800MHz frequencies

– Maintains current City/ County interoperability

– Existing WPB mobile/ portable radios remain operational

• Cons

– Until County upgrades to full P-25, then 791 radios replaced

– Radio resource management transitions away from City

– County has no set timeframe to improve RF infrastructure to P-25

– Configuration may lack appropriate WPB building coverage

– No direct interoperability to MPSCC


General Concerns

The Harris and Motorola submittals we have reviewed are typical of unsolicited proposals:

• Proposed coverage performance is based on perceived need… not on the documented input from the full user community. High risk user expectations will not be met.

• Designed for “Blue Sky” performance. Little to no attention given to M/W, standby power systems or hardening.


General Concerns

The Harris and Motorola submittal we have reviewed contain deficiencies typical of unsolicited proposals:

• A lack of performance safeguards and accountability that ensure the products supplied are reliable and provided in a timely manner, with workmanship geared to the highest standards. This places the first responders on the street at risk.

• The transfer of risk away from the vendor and onto the owner. This sets the stage for change orders, cost escalation, and finger pointing.


Competitive RFP ProcessToday’s public safety radio networks are more

typically purchased via a competitive procurement process.

Project-25’s open standards coupled with the large number of qualified vendors now in the market, as compared to ten years ago, have

driven the move to open competition.

Competitive RFPs always secure the best set of services, reliability and features for the

lowest cost.


RFP-Driven ProcessSteps taken in a typical Network Modernization

• Planning/ Needs Assessment– Interviews with users and managers

– Conceptual system design alternatives

– Cost estimate development

• Procurement Phase

– RFP specification development

– Acceptance Test Plan development

– Evaluation of vendor proposals

– Contract negotiation Support

• Implementation Phase

– Owner technical support and supervision of contractor progress

– Alignment and acceptance test verification


Rank of Alternatives

#1 Competitive/ RFP – Safest alternative to obtain the best, most advantageous P-25 radio system for the

lowest cost.

#2 Harris Proposal – Potential, but only with substantial changes/enhancements through aggressive negotiation.

#3 County System – Potential, but requires sole source acquisition for either level of access. Risk mitigation req’d.

-- Motorola Proposal – Not an option due to sole source (unjustified) requirements. But, this proposal

strongly suggests a potential price decrease via RFP is likely.


Questions?


Thank You!

Tusa Consulting Services

Todd Mechler

Tallahassee, Florida

(850) 445-4564

[email protected]

Nick Tusa

Covington, Louisiana

(985) 249-6467

[email protected]

Carl Rader

Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

(954) 707-1318

[email protected]

tusa consulting services presentation to the city of west palm beach city commission

Documents