AIM Wireless Solutions
Find how much RF interference is in
n your coverage area, ……
before and after rrebanding!
The experts say that
it’s not possible, it takes too long, it costs too much, it just can’t be
done! We say, “That’s not true!
“In the field, we know knew where deadspots
exist, where our mobile radios don’t work.
When we have had to pull someone over, we’ll we’d follow him
until we we are
in an area where we know knew our radios will would work!” ” says a former Illinois State Police officer.
“I would throw away my mobile phone, there are so many
times when needed to make a call, and I was not able to use it” says an Elk
Grove, IL police officer.
I can tell you exactly where the deadspots are between
Route 83 and Route 53 along Thorndale Road.
I drive it every day, and I know when and where I can’t use my phone!” says the President of a Bensenville, IL
company.
How many deadspots exist
in a major metropolitan area?
Dear Reader,
PPublic safety
officers know they exist. Commuters who
travel the same route daily know they exist.
Drivers Business people using their cell phones have
lost calls their connection in the middle of an important calldiscussions.
How
many times have you not been able to use your cell phone? How many times have you received complaints
about your mobile radio system? Dropped calls, garbled voices, and poor connections are common problems. When a mobile radio or handset becomes suddenly unusable, the person’s probably in a deadspot! These problems are all symptoms of RF
interference, but it happens so often that many people have begun to accept them as a part of wireless communications instead of a problem that should be fixed!
Somebody should do
something about this!
The plan is in place! To quickly recap what the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has put together:
July 8, 2004, Washington D.C.
The Federal Communications
Commission adopts the Report and Order “Improving Public Safety Communications
in the 800 MHz band”, a highly anticipated action that took four years of
deliberation, research and debate from the public safety, wireless providers,
and the engineering, economic, legal and policy communities.
“In this Report and Order, we adopt a two-prong
solution to the public safety interference problem in the 800 MHz band, with
each prong having several components.
First, to more adequately respond to individual interference events
immediately, we establish an objective standard for defining “unacceptable
interference” to 800 MHz non-cellular systems, establish rules and procedures
for the expeditious implementation and enforcement of this standard, and
endorse a variety of technical solutions and mechanisms, defined as “Enhanced
Best Practices” to address interference abatement in the short term. Second, to provide a better spectrum
environment for public safety in the long term, we adopt a plan for
reconfiguration of the 800 MHz band and provide a thirty-six month transition
by incumbent licensees from their current frequency assignments to new
frequency assignments in the band.”[1]
The Rule & Order is a great
achievement by the FCC. It is a major step towards
providing a better spectral environment. A standard for unacceptable
interference is
now established.
Three steps make up the
first part of the Rule & Order, which took effect on January 21, 2005.
“We adopt a new, objective definition of
“unacceptable interference” to determine when public safety and other
non-cellular 800 MHz band licensees are entitled to interference protection”
“We assign strict responsibility for eliminating
unacceptable interference to the ESMR or cellular telephone operator(s)
implicated in the interference occurrence, and assign joint responsibility to
all involved commercial operators if unacceptable interference results from a
combination of signals from multiple systems.”
“We require ESMR and cellular telephone licensees,
on request, to notify public safety and CII licensees prior to activating new
or modified cells, and require public safety and CII licensees receiving such
information to notify ESMT and cellular telephone licenses of changes in system
parameters.”[2]
The second part of the
ruling involves the reconfiguration of the 800 MHz band to separate public
safety, critical
infrastructure industries (CII), and other non-cellular systems on one hand, and
ESMR systems, such as Nextel’s, on the other. This too, will move forward, with Nextel’s acceptance
of the terms of
the plan on
Monday, February 7, 2005.
“The method of interference abatement we adopt
herein leaves to the involved parties…the choice of how to best ensure that
their systems do not cause unacceptable interference……to the extent that
interference results from the combination of signals from multiple
transmitters, and potentially multiple licensees, we place joint responsibility
on such CMRS licensees to eliminate unacceptable interference using the
remedies of their choice.”[3]
Our past experience in
interference analysis shows that the problem is not always caused by Nextel. Now that interference reporting will require a response, proper analysis will tell
us who needs to take action. Wireless
providers are on notice to keep from interfering with the networks used by
Public Safety and the Critical Infrastructure Industries.
The Transition Administrator is moving ahead with their plans. The first wave of
reconfigurations will start June 27, 2005.
Over the
next three years, the entire process of rebanding should finish by 2008, if everything goes smoothly!
Just one question left…….
Just how much interference is out there?
What is a drive test?
That’s a big question!
Finding and resolving
interference is
now a high priority, a mandatory action for
certain parties. Interference abatement has
moved to the forefront of regulatory attention. Effective methodologies and tools to
deal with the problem need to be put into use now!
A
Traditionally,
a “fileeld trials” or a “drive test” can help locate deadspotsis done.
For some engineers, this means going
out with a handset and making a series of calls while driving down the highway. The engineer and logginglogs when a call can or can’t be made. The report is simplevery basic. , aA list is compiled with of locationsstreet or highway
intersections, the
time of day,
and whether the
call cois complete, call or incomplete. It is systematic in its process, and used by Department of Transportation engineers
in different states.
At anotherOn a more advanced level,
a scanner is used on the drive test. The
scanner detects what signals exist in the environment. This captures each signal’s “measured” field strength, which is the basis for determining unacceptable interference as specified in the 800 MHz Rule &
Order. The scanner creates a, and the
scanner creates a text file that contains more information
about the environmentthose signals and that file can be transferred to a PC
or laptop. The necessary
informationdata needed for an interference analysis is
transferred to a using a
manual “cut and paste” into an Microsoft
Excel spreadsheet using
a manual “copy and paste” operation. That spreadsheet contains the formulas of calculating
interference,
and uses the data
from the scanner
to solve for interferencewith formulas. It’s a proven method for mathematically calculating interference.
If a few channels are analyzed, the calculation time to do the study can be quick. When hundreds of channels are involved, Ssolving the
equations can could take a while, ; perhaps a dayhours, perhaps or even all
weekend. Sometimes it never finishes
because the computer ran out of memory to finish the problem. This is usually seen on
Monday morning, along withSeeing the infamous “blue screen of death” on the computer monitor on Monday morning is not an uncommon
occurrence!
The limitation of this method is the computing
performance of Microsoft Excel or of the computer, not the methodology!.
Is there
a betterCan
the performance barrier be broken? way?
We did a drive test of 26
miles of highway in the Chicago. area, aAt 5:00pm on a busy
Friday afternoon. W, we loaded up our
equipment, an Andrew Scannerscanner, with 800 MHz receivers, a GPS
antenna and AIM software on a laptop. We started in Hoffman Estates,
Illinois by Barrington Road and I-90. We drove east towards downtown Chicago, through busy Schaumburg
rush hour traffic, through Arlington Heights, past O’Hare airport near Rosemont
and Des Plaines, eastbound south on I-94 through the heart of the
downtown Chicago and back west on I-290.
We got back at 8:00 pm..
At By the end of the
drive, we had collected xx 40 MBGB of
data and more
than 120,000
GPS records..
Every 300 feetAs we drove, the
scanner recorded what frequencies and their corrosponding signal strength in the
800 MHz band were being usedin the environment. It captured the corresponding
signal strength and in the area the latitude and longitude for that spot. We captured every frequency in the 800MHz
range, along with the RSSI strength. (etc, etc.). Sampling
data every 300 feetThe 800 MHz Rule & Order specifies a minimum measurement area of 300 ft. x
300 ft. To meet that requirement,
we’ll do an interference study every
300 feet along that 26 mile route.
gave us 461 separate
sets of data for the 26 mile routeHow many studies is that? A quick bit of math tells us that (26 miles x 5,280 feet) /
300 feet/mile = 461 studies!
,
uniquely identified by the latitude
and longitude.
What did the drive test tell us?
What did we find?
We picked out seven
frequencies belonging to an Illinois Public Safety Agencyagency as an example. We wanted to see how the mobile radios for
this Public Safety agency would be affected along this 26 mile stretch of
highway. We did an interference study
for the seven frequencies against all of the other 800 MHz frequencies that the scanner had
detected, every
300 feet., for every 300 ft along the drive, a total of 461 studies.
For those seven frequencies belonging to an Illinois
Public Safety agency, , we found 477861 interference
points in 13
unique locations along a that 26 mile route. 78Sixty one47
incidents where the interference level (C/I) was less than 20db!
We know that aAt these locations, their
peopleofficers
in the field would be unable to use their mobile radios, to receive a call
or make one. ThThat is an
average of one location
every 2 miles! Not an acceptable
situation for a public safety official!. Look at the cFigurehart
below
for1
for a detailed
look at the results of the analysis.
|
Interference
type |
Intermodulation |
Wideband / TX noise |
RX
Spurious noise |
Interference points |
||||
|
RX (MHz) |
C/I < 20 dB |
C/I % |
C/I < 20 dB |
C/I
% |
C/I < 20 dB |
C/I % |
Total |
Total
(%) |
|
866.xxxx |
4 |
0.9% |
2 |
0.4% |
2 |
0.4% |
8 |
1.74% |
|
866.xxxx |
4 |
0.9% |
3 |
0.7% |
2 |
0.4% |
9 |
1.95% |
|
866.xxxx |
4 |
0.9% |
2 |
0.4% |
2 |
0.4% |
8 |
1.74% |
|
866.xxxx |
5 |
1.1% |
3 |
0.7% |
2 |
0.4% |
10 |
2.17% |
|
867.xxxx |
4 |
0.9% |
2 |
0.4% |
2 |
0.4% |
8 |
1.74% |
|
867.xxxx |
4 |
0.9% |
4 |
0.9% |
1 |
0.2% |
9 |
1.95% |
|
868.xxxx |
4 |
0.9% |
3 |
0.7% |
2 |
0.4% |
9 |
1.95% |
|
Total |
29 |
6.3% |
19 |
4.1% |
13 |
2.8% |
61 |
13.2% |
ChartFigure 1 1. Summary of interference analysis on I-90 chicago
area
(chart)
ChartsNumbers can can be hard to
interpretvisualize,
especially if you’re not an RF engineer.
A graph of
these results is shown in Figure 2. It shows the relative percentage of the different types of
interference found for those frequencies on Chicago’s highways.
In this case, of the 78 interference
points found, 48% were intermodulation, 31% were wideband noise, and the
remaining 15% were receiver noise.
Since we have the latitude and longitude Let’s take
another look at the data. Since we had the
longitude and latitude information for each of these 13 locationsfrom the drive test,
wwe can transfer
these can easily plot these onto a map of
Chicago..
Figure 1
Map
1. Map of Chicago with iInterference
points in
Chicago
Now
we have a visual reference of where interference is exists in our world,
or more specifically,
on a busy rush hour
evening in the City city of Chicago.
(map)Our next step is to
analyze these locations to see who is causing the interference. In this case, we can tell you that
interference is being caused by certain Cellular A and Cellular B channels, and which ones were caused by Nextel’s signals!
We’ve purposely not named
the Public Safety entity, for obvious reasons.
We will have presented the data to them by the time you get this letter,
because it is important for them to know. In this test run, it looks like there is a lot of interference in their network! We do need to know how they are using these channels to
get a better idea of what’s going on at that
location.
But now we know where to
look, and where to start resolving interference problems!
Four hundred and sixty one studies were processed
and analyzed. Using traditional tools, if each one took an hour,
461 studies would take 19 days, working day and night! We
didn’t stay up that long!
“Four hundred and sixty one interference studies were processed and anlalyzedanalyzed in two hours!”………..
What did
this drive test tell us?
We’ve
purposely not named the Public Safety entity, for obvious reasons. We will have presented the data to them by
the time you get this letter, because it is important information for them to
know.
On the surface, it looks like xx%
of their coverage is a problem. We would need to
know how they are using these channels to get a better idea of what kind of
problems they are having, but at least know now we know
where to look!
Chicago is approximately
234 square miles. A grid with a density
of 300 feet would give us 72,500 locations to study, 4,118 miles of
driving. How long would it take an RF
engineer to analyze the data?
The
drive test would take 137 hours,
perhaps two to three weeks. The bulk of the work comes when the data
needs to be analyzed.
Pity the poor RF engineer
who is assigned the task of doing 72,500 interference studies! Using traditional methods, even at one hour
per study, it would take 3,020 days (working day and night) or 8 years! No wonder why drive testing is done as a
last resort, rather than a primary tool for interference analysis!We broke the performance
barrier!
Actually we broke two
performance barriers! First, we broke the performance barrier
for the time to
process a
single study. In processing the data from the Chicago drive test, we
were able to do 461 studies in less than two hours. Our high performance interference analysis
engine can take a complex study of 1,000 channels and finish it in seconds!
Secondly, we automated the processing of sequential studies. When hundreds, or thousands, of studies need to be done to assess the
interference impact on an area, automation is the only way to finish the job. Instead of manually processing each study; manually moving text into
an Excel spreadsheet, running the study (for how many hours?), and then starting all over again for the next study, we transfer the data directly
into our software and begin processing all of the studies with minimal effort.
Breaking the speed limit
for each step
is an
achievement in
itself, but together, the resulting speed brings new
dimensions to interference analysis! We can take a year of work and do it in one week on a single laptop! Use a multiprocessor server and you could process the job in even less time! Blazing speed, no matter
how complex the environment you need to analyze!
Finally, an RF engineer can gather data in the
environment, compute
a mathematically accurate picture of
interference in the environment, and determine who is causing the problems in the field, without limitation!
With IMPowerDrive, we
estimate the analysis can be done in 7 weeks on a single laptop. Even faster on a multi-processor server,
perhaps two weeks?
Getting
the most from the collected dataSpeed enables new capabilities!
Let’s
examine look at what
occurred in the drive testthe possibilities. What we can do with the data? , what the dataWhat does the data reveals,? and hHow do we can use that it? information. What can we extrapolate and
predict from this information? And
finally how can we use this data to make sound decisions?
In the environment there are thousands
of antennas transmitting and receiving data.
At any one point in time, for a single location in space, there may be a
hundred frequencies channels at different signal strengths,
coming from different directions, from many ddifferent sources.
A scanner can collects data about each of
these signals and provides a digital output file for further
analysis. The digital output that is
essential to an interference analysis includes the GPS Ttime, Llatitude, Llongitude, Ffrequency, a signal strength level called RSSI (Receive Min RssiSignal Strength Indicator) and, Avg Rssi, Max Rssi
and a Mmarkerxxx, xxxx, xxxx, xxxx. With this information we can calculate many different
types of interference, including
intermodulation, transmitter noise, receiver desensitization, transmitter
harmonics and transmitter spurious output, simultaneously, in one pass.
Not only can we calculate
that interference will occur, but we can also determine what signals are creating the
interference problem.
. These are shown in Chart 1.
Why is
it important to scan the area?
If you only use thehave data at hand
about your own transmission
equipment, you are limited to finding onlycan calculate
internal interference caused by your own transmissionsequipment. This is the easiest interference to findpredict and analyze. because you have all of the data you need at
hand. Co-channel and adjacnetadjacent-channel interference
in your own network areis a simple interference
analysis problems
that are easy to solve.
But what
about the frequencies that you don’t know about?
This is Intermodulation is the most likely the cause
for interference
problems that causes RF engineers to scratch their heads. Intermodulation is caused when external signals mix together with your channels in a particular way to form new signals that disrupt
communications. Interference can be mathematically calculated and predicted
if you have the right information. If you don’t have that information, it is impossible to calculate. The computing effort for hundreds of channels can be
significant, billions
of calculations!
In an open environment, you don’t know and can’t control the incoming
signals from other sources. when troubleshooting deadspots. If they cause intermodulation products with your channels, it becomes apparent when The only
way you know you have a deadspot is when someone is
standing at that location, and tries tocan’t make a call
with his mobile radio. But the person has to be
standing there to find out. The information from the
scanner in a
drive test allows you to mathematically create a simulated model where If he
can’t make that call, and he bothers
to report the problem only then do you know you have a probleminterference caused by
intermodulation can be precisely identified and located..
The Illinois State policeo officer mentioned above earlier knows where
those locations are based on personal field experience. They know when not to use their radio when
they are in certain locations. But you
and I know that he should be able to make a call whenever and wherever he is. His life or someone’s life may depend on it!
Without scanning the area, it is not possible to
troubleshoot interference problems. If
you
‘are
installing a new system, or tweaking an existing system, or re-bandingchanging or adding frequencies, it is likely possible that some
of your frequencies will cause
interference with channels may experience interference caused by
external signalsothers. You may be creating interference
problems for others!
Without scanning the area, it’s not possible to properly troubleshoot interference
problems!
Fixing interference problems
without knowing who else is in the area is like trying to find enemy land mines
without a metal detector. Sending in your troops in without
a scan of the area will give them plenty of field experience to drawn upon!
This is precisely the problem
that Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure Industries are having with
wireless providers in the field.
Interference problems are randomly reported, by those
who happen across locations where interference occursthey are having problems. . Many problems have been reported, but how many haven’t been reported because they haven’t been
found? Interference problems
exist, but who is the cause? Can
your really judge how much interference is in an area based on random reports?
By collecting all of the data in the
field, it is now possible to study the effect
of all of the other frequencies on a specific channel or group of channels..
It is that simple! By collecting
signal information every 300 feet along a highway, we can
obtain the information needed to caEverything you need to know is collected in a text file. Now all of the possible creators of interference can be found and investigated!
lculate
interference points along that route.
·
WYoue
can identify the frequency, and the therefore the identity
of the source which is causing interference to your
channels!!
·
And we can
tell yYou
can determine what
other channels should be used at that location for interference free operation!
·
And mMost importantly, we you could can simulate what
the effect would be if you made changes to the spectrumfrequency assignments. You can determine what interference would be
caused by those new channel assignments!
Each
public
Public safety Safety entity, each critical
Critical
infrastructure Infrastructure company,
and each commercial radio service provider using the airwaves wants to know
that his channels are clear and interference free. TAny number ofhere are many
users out there that you don’t know
about. may be keeping you from that goal!
What will it take to do a whole city?
The city of Chicago occupies
approximately 234 square miles. A grid
with a density of 300 feet would give us 72,500 locations to study. There would be approximately 4,000 miles of
roadway. How long would it take to
collect and analyze the data?
The drive test for 4,000 miles would take about 180
hours. That would be about eighteen ten hour days. That’s the easy part. The
bulk of the work comes when the data needs to be processed and analyzed. Sampling at 300 feet provides 72,500
locations. Pity the poor RF engineer
who is assigned the task of doing 72,500 interference studies, copying and
pasting numbers into an Excel spreadsheet!
Using traditional methods, even at one hour per study, it would take
3,020 days (working day and night) or 8 years!
No wonder why drive testing is not a preferred tool interference analysis!
But using our
methodologies and our software tools on a laptop, 72,500 studies could be processed in 200 hours! In a little over a week, after collecting the data, we can tell you where
interference exists in a metropolitan city and who’s causing it. Now
we can
experiment with different frequencies to see what life would be like
post-reconfiguration!
Somebody should do
something about this!
July 8, 2004, Washington D.C. The Federal
Communications Commission adopts the Rule and Order “Improving Public Safety
Communications in the 800 MHz band” (WT Docket 02-55), a highly anticipated
action that took four years of deliberation, research and debate from the
public safety, wireless providers, and the engineering, economic, legal and
policy communities.
“In this
Report and Order, we adopt a two-prong solution to the public safety
interference problem in the 800 MHz band, with each prong having several
components. First, to more adequately
respond to individual interference events immediately, we establish an
objective standard for defining “unacceptable interference” to 800 MHz
non-cellular systems, establish rules and procedures for the expeditious
implementation and enforcement of this standard, and endorse a variety of
technical solutions and mechanisms, defined as “Enhanced Best Practices” to
address interference abatement in the short term. Second, to provide a better spectrum environment for public
safety in the long term, we adopt a plan for reconfiguration of the 800 MHz
band and provide a thirty-six month transition by incumbent licensees from
their current frequency assignments to new frequency assignments in the band.”[4]1
1Section II, Executive
Summary, Rule & Order (WT Docket 02-55)
The Rule and Order is a
great achievement by the FCC, a major step towards providing a better spectral
environment! The standard for
unacceptable interference has been set. Three steps make up the first part of the
Rule and Order, which took effect on January 21, 2005.
“We
adopt a new, objective definition of “unacceptable interference” to determine
when public safety and other non-cellular 800 MHz band licensees are entitled
to interference protection”
“We
assign strict responsibility for eliminating unacceptable interference to the
ESMR or cellular telephone operator(s) implicated in the interference
occurrence, and assign joint responsibility to all involved commercial
operators if unacceptable interference results from a combination of signals
from multiple systems.”
“We
require ESMR and cellular telephone licensees, on request, to notify public
safety and CII licensees prior to activating new or modified cells, and require
public safety and CII licensees receiving such information to notify ESMT and
cellular telephone licenses of changes in system parameters.”[5] 2
2Section II, Executive Summary, Rule & Order (WT
Docket 02-55)
The second part of the
ruling involves the reconfiguration of the 800 MHz band to separate public
safety, CII, and other non-cellular systems on one hand, and ESMR systems, such
as Nextel’s, on the other.
“The
method of interference abatement we adopt herein leaves to the involved
parties…the choice of how to best ensure that their systems do not cause
unacceptable interference……to the extent that interference results from the
combination of signals from multiple transmitters, and potentially multiple
licensees, we place joint responsibility on such CMRS licensees to eliminate
unacceptable interference using the remedies of their choice.”[6] 3
3Section III-B.20 Major Findings and Decisions, Rule &
Order (WT Docket 02-55).
What is very clear?
The 800 MHz Rule &
Order is very clear on its goal:
The
ruling is very clear!
Ifyou have interferenceThe limits for unacceptable interference have been established, youcanget it fixed.If you areThe party who is causing interference is responsible for fixing itcausing it, you must fix it(within 48 hours, if it is affecting a Public Safety network)network).- If you make changes in your system, you must tell
everyone whom
you may affect.
The first wave of
reconfigurations will start June 27th, 2005
and finish by 2008.
What
is unclear………
·
How do you know if if you have
interference in your network?
·
How do you know
that it is “unacceptable interference”?
·
How do you know
that all the interference locations in my network have been reportedcan be identified?
·
How many of my
frequencies are affected by others?
·
Who are
they?is
affecting my frquenciesfrequencies? And bBy how much?
·
Who do I need to notify
when I make changes to my network?
·
How do I know that
rebanding doesn’t make things worse for me?
·
Will I get
comparable facilities with the new frequencies?
·
How do I certify
that my environment after rebanding is interference free?
·
How do I know that
future changes in my network won’t adversely affect others?
·
How do my changes
affect the border countries, before during and after reconfiguration?
What do
we think?
An inoperable mobile radio may
be a good pointer forindication of interference at a location, but
you cannot depend upon random interference reports to tell you how good
your network ismuch interference you have in your network. However tTheat information that is
reported, location, time ofis not very complete. day and channel, is
hardly comprehensive.
·
A drive
testfield
trialfield trial can give you a systematic method
of identifying deadspots. As our trial
in Chicago shows, the amount of interference can be very significant!
·
If theUsing proper tools are used
in in the
drive test, a wealth of significant and re-usable
data is collected for analysis and processing.
·
The technologies
currently used by RF engineers depend too much on
manual transfer of informationdata, and the processing speed of existing
programs are much too slow to achieve meet the response times demanded in the 800 MHz Rule and & Order.
·
TWhen the 800 MHz Rule &
Order was written, methodologies
and the technologies to find and detect interference was in the
dark agesdeliver
an analysis in a practical timeframe did not exist!
when the
FCC put the Rule and Order together.
·The technological demands that the 800 MHz Rule & Order requires to deliver on its promise are immense!
The Rule & Order needs a technology breakthrough. Breakthrough
technology is defined as “a technology that makes it possible to
exceed existing performance limitations”. The interference analysis engine behind our products is not Not just
faster, but several orders of magnitude faster. The
limitations that keep drive tests from being a practical engineering tool are now gone.
We think
that InterMod60TM, IM Optimizer TM
and IM PowerDrive TM is are products which
represent breakthrough technology. New technology, that hasdeveloped arrived in
time to help sort outresolve a very complex, difficult and thorny
issue, – “Improving
Public Safety Communication in the 800 MHz bandBand”.
With these products, interference detection,
abatement efforts and reconfiguration activities can occur with the following benefits:
·
Accurate, complete and
comprehensive interference detection.
·
Better information for
decision making.
·
Certification that an interference free
environment has been created.
What
can you do?
Give us a call,! S or send us an e-mail. We would be happy to
discuss your current needs related to the 800 MHz Rule and Order. We realize that each person has a unique
situation. The common goal for all
parties is to achieve a long lasting solution for interference free
transmission in a wireless world!
It’s essential to resolve the 800 MHz problems
quickly and efficiently. A lot of time
and money is going into this effort. No
one wants to be sitting around three years later deciding on Plan “B”.
But Tthe clock has
already started to click.! Act
now to stay ahead of the crowd, and to do it right the first time!!
