ATTACHMENT FIVE AUSTIN AND FRISCO, TX TEST REPORT -162- -163- Agenda  Testing in Manhattan  Indoor Testing Summary  Comparison testing in Austin and Frisco TX 2 - 164 - Confidential and Proprietary Manhattan Testing  Conducted fall of 2000  Tested TruePosition U-TDOA technology, same technology operating today  Test conducted on Verizon network in mid town Manhattan by independent Verizon Labs  Followed methodology equivalent to CSRIC test plan  Dense urban area – similar to dense urban area in San Francisco  Many story concrete, steel, glass buildings 3 - 165 - Confidential and Proprietary Manhattan Test Area I 4 PIONEERING LOCATION SOLUTIONS FOR A SAFER WORLD Con?dentwa? and Propnetary -166- Dense Urban Area - Manhattan earth 1.. PIONEERING LOCATION SOLUTIONS FOR A SAFER WORLD Con?dentxa? and Propnetary -167- . True ion' Dense Urban Area San PIONEERING LOCATION SOLUTIONS FOR A SAFER WORLD Confidential and Proprietary -168- ion' Confidential and Proprietary True ..I.. .l .. I .Iu?InaSample Dense Urban Buildings - Manhattan PIONEERING LOCATION SOLUTIONS FOR A SAFER WORLD -169- Sample Urban Test Buildings San Francisco Truep@i?" I 8 PIONEERING LOCATION SOLUTIONS FOR A SAFER WORLD Confidential and Proprietary -170- Similar Test Point Distribution in Buildings  Manhattan  Tests points selected on ground floor and top floor  On each floor, 3 test points selected  Exterior room (with window)  Interior room  Building core (near elevator)  San Francisco example – Building 1  TP1: In lobby bar (deep indoors)  TP2: 4th floor interior corridor  TP3: 31st floor, end of corridor, near window  TP4: 8 floor side corridor, near window 9 - 171 - Confidential and Proprietary Manhattan Exterior Room Examples Exterior Room Ground Floor U-12 Exterior Room Top Floor U-10 10 - 172 - Confidential and Proprietary Manhattan Interior Room Examples Interior Room Top Floor U-13 Interior Room Ground Floor U-15 11 - 173 - Confidential and Proprietary Manhattan Building Core Examples Building Core Top Floor U-16 Building Core Ground Floor U-18 12 - 174 - Confidential and Proprietary Manhattan Dense Urban Indoor Results 67% 95% U10 Exterior room, top floor 92 120 U12 Exterior room, ground floor 84 202 U13 Interior room, top floor 87 125 U15 Interior room, ground floor 67 208 U16 Building Core, top floor 99 129 U18 Building Core, ground floor 120 204 Average across urban canyon indoor scenarios 92 165 13 - 175 - Confidential and Proprietary Indoor Testing Summary I 14 PIONEERING LOCATION SOLUTIONS FOR A SAFER WORLD -176- Accuracy and Yield Comparison Dense Urban  Based on CSRIC testing in San Francisco, and Verizon testing in Manhattan 67% 90% 57.1 102.4 154 93.90% Polaris 116.7 400.1 569.3 99.40% Qualcomm 155.8 267.5 328.1 85.80% 92 150 165 99% NextNav TruePosition 95% Yield  NextNav and TruePosition had good accuracy  Polaris and TruePosition had good yield 15 - 177 - Confidential and Proprietary Accuracy and Yield Comparison  Based on CSRIC testing in San Francisco and TechnoCom testing with CSRIC based plan in Wilmington  Urban Comparison 67% 62.8 90% 141.1 95% Yield 196.1 95.40% Polaris 198.4 447.8 729.9 99.90% Qualcomm 226.8 449.3 507.1 90.80% 87.3 140.7 163.2 100 NextNav TruePosition  NextNav and TruePosition had good accuracy, but NextNav had several failed attempts which were not included in accuracy results  Polaris and TruePosition had good yield 16 - 178 - Confidential and Proprietary Accuracy and Yield Comparison Suburban 67% 90% 95% Yield 28.6 52.9 62.2 100.00% 232.1 420.7 571.4 99.80% Qualcomm 75.1 204.8 295.7 91.40% TruePosition 66.1 116.2 163 100 NextNav Polaris  NextNav and TruePosition had good accuracy and yield  Polaris has very poor accuracy  Qualcomm fails a significant portion of attempts 17 - 179 - Confidential and Proprietary AGPS/AFLT or AGPS/RTT is not Sufficient PSAP Testing in Frisco and Austin, TX 18 - 180 - Confidential and Proprietary Test Methodology  Goal: Test real world accuracy of Current E911 deployed Technologies  Parameters:  Off-the-shelf phones  Three air interfaces - Three location technologies  U-TDOA on GSM  A-GPS/AFLT on CDMA  A-GPS/RTT on UMTS  Conducted Fall 2010  Real world testing conducted in two PSAP areas of Texas  Frisco: Suburban  Austin: Urban, campus (U of Texas) 19 - 181 - Confidential and Proprietary Test Methodology  Over 3500 real 911 calls made to local PSAPs  At least ten calls from each test point  At least three iterations of calls at each test point  Concrete, steel, glass buildings for indoor testing  Suburban area of Frisco and Downtown AustinUniversity of Texas Campus  Test point selection  Both indoor and outdoor test points  Chosen test points around city provide reasonable representation of subscriber use  Ground truth determined prior to test execution.  Daily export of PSAP database allowed post-processing to determine error of each test call at each point 20 - 182 - Confidential and Proprietary Indoor Results - Current E911 Technologies Indoor Test Calls Percentile U-TDOA A-GPS/AFLT (CDMA) A-GPS/RTT (UMTS) 67th 77.5m 157.6m 357.2m 90th 178.5m 543.9m 829.6m 95th 239.4m 1088.2m 1438.6m 21 - 183 - Confidential and Proprietary Summary  Location technologies deployed today can reliably and accurately locate E911 calls from indoor locations  Wireless operators are increasingly relying on GPS based solutions, such as AGPS + AFLT and AGPS + RTT, which do not work indoors  The FCC now has enough information about indoor location technologies to move forward to solve the increasing problem of inadequate indoor location coverage 22 - 184 - Confidential and Proprietary CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 6th day of August, 2013, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served by electronic service on the following: Chairwoman Mignon Clyburn Federal Communications Commission Attn: Louis Peraertz, Legal Advisor Louis.Peraertz@fcc.gov Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel Federal Communications Commission Attn: David Goldman, Senior Legal Advisor David.Goldman@fcc.gov Commissioner Ajit Pai Federal Communications Commission Attn: Courtney Reinhard, Legal Advisor Courtney.Reinhard@fcc.gov David Turetsky Chief Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Federal Communications Commission David.Turetsky@fcc.gov David Furth Deputy Chief Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Federal Communications Commission David.Furth@fcc.gov Timothy May Communications Manager and Project Specialist for NextGeneration 9-1-1 Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Federal Communications Commission Timothy.May@fcc.gov David Siehl Legal Counsel Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Federal Communications Commission David.Siehl@fcc.gov - 185 - Dana Zelman Legal Counsel Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Federal Communications Commission Dana.Zelman@fcc.gov Erika Olsen Special Counsel Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Federal Communications Commission Erika.Olsen@fcc.gov Thomas Beers Chief Policy and Licensing Division Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Federal Communications Commission Tom.Beers@fcc.gov Ruth Milkman Chief Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission Ruth.Milkman@fcc.gov James Schlichting Senior Deputy Bureau Chief Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission James.Schlichting@fcc.gov Jane Jackson Associate Bureau Chief Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission Jane.Jackson@fcc.gov Charles Mathias Associate Bureau Chief Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission Charles.Mathias@fcc.gov John Leibovitz Deputy Bureau Chief - 186 - Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission John.Leibovitz@fcc.gov Paul Murray Assistant Bureau Chief Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission Paul.Murray@fcc.gov Tom Peters Chief Engineer Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Federal Communications Commission Tom.Peters@fcc.gov Julius Knapp Chief Engineer Office of Engineering and Technology Federal Communications Commission Julius.Knapp@fcc.gov Ron Repasi Deputy Chief Engineer Office of Engineering and Technology Federal Communications Commission Ronald.Repasi@fcc.gov Matthew Hussey Associate Chief for Policy Office of Engineering and Technology Federal Communications Commission Matthew.Hussey@fcc.gov Mark Settle Chief Policy and Rules Division Office of Engineering and Technology Federal Communications Commission Mark.Settle@fcc.gov _________________________________ Lula Robinson - 187 -