1.

• Radio Interoperability

2005 GSA Academy 2. Studies show that across the nation, public safety officials have trouble communicating in operational situations one-third of the time. Rick Murphy Program Manager Public Safety Wireless Network Dept. Of Justice Radio Interoperability: Why? 3. Definition of Radio Interoperability

Radio Interoperability is the ability for public safety providers to communicate, on demand, in real time, when needed, and as authorized.

4. 1989 Ramstein Air Base,NATO Air Force Demonstration Team Crash: Nearly 600 casualties, nearly 90 dead,Poor Planning &Radio Interoperability WERE Factors 5. Other disasters impacted Radio Interoperability WAS a Factor 6. Interoperable Communications System Prerequisites

Political Will

Funding

Spectrum Common to all Users

7. PROPOSED SPECTRUM What are the public safety bands from which we can attempt to obtain frequencies? 8. Standards-Based Shared Systems System-SpecificRoaming Gateway (Console Patch) Mutual Aid Channels Talkaround Swap Radios Most Complete Long-Term Solution Full-featured, Wide Area Short-Term System Modification Well Known With Public Safety Agencies Simple Short-Term Solutions APCO Defined 6 Levels of Interoperability Method Fit Level Easily deployed Time-consuming 9. CURRENT LEVEL OF INTEROPERABILITYEast Bay

Alameda County

Fremont

City of Alameda

City of Union City

Newark

San Leandro

Dublin

Livermore / Pleasanton

UC Berkeley

EBMUD* (conventional)

CaLTrans

Oakland includes:

Albany

Piedmont

Emeryville

Port of Oakland

BART

Richmond

Pinole

Contra Costa County

Co Co County cities *

Level 2, 3, 4 & 5 VHF / UHF Conventional Repeated / simulcast Level 3 & 5 800 MHz Trunked Systems

Hayward

City of Berkeley

CHP

CDF

Coast Guard

FBI

10. Level 1: Swap Radios

Works Via: When disaster/major event occurs, involved agencies physically exchange radios from their networks with each other upon arrival at scene.

Advantages:

• Low cost/Simple to setup

• Works across frequency bands

Disadvantages:

• Impractical for large scale events

• Delay with setup while swap is transacted

• Limited range

• Advanced features/config. not understood by Guest users

11. Level 2: Talkaround

Works Via: Multiple radios talk directly to each other in conventional mode using compatible subscribers--no infrastructure link.

Advantage:

• Low cost to setup

• Simple to initiate calls

Disadvantage:

• Very limited range

• No advanced features available to users

• Requires compatible over the air interface

• Requires same frequency band for subscribers

12. Level 3: Mutual Aid Channels

Works Via: Multiple radios talk directly to each other using common channels in conventional mode

Advantage:

• Added range over Level 1 since infrastructure is involved

• Relatively low cost to setup

• Defacto standard

• Setting it up forces some planning by regional agencies

Disadvantage:

• Requires compatible interfaces

• Requires trunked and conventional modes in subscriber

• No advanced features available to users

• Requires same frequency band for all subscribers

13. Level 4: Gateways (fixed and transportable)

SmartLink - I Switch/I Network

M/A-Com Network First

Motorolas Motobridge (SSRN)

Raytheon /JPS ACU1000 *

Infinimode Infinimux G4 Plus *

* When installed and configured as fixed equipment

14. Fixed Gateways offer:

Provides Interoperability between non compatible communication systems

Provides Dispatch capability

• Backup to existing dispatch consoles

Can replay last conversation

Intercom between dispatchers

Can interface to phone systems

Allows connectivity between a cell phone and radio systems

15. Level 4: Gateway Console Patch

Requires 24-7 manned dispatch center

Users request patch via dispatcher

Dynamic capability easy to set-up

150 MHz System 800 MHz System 16. Level 4: Gateway Interface Box

Hardware component that sits between two networks

RF or 4-wire audio links connect systems

Provides audio only, no system specific features

150 MHz System 800 MHz System Gateway Unit ID Emergency Busy 17. Level 4: Deployable RF Gateways

Examples: ACU1000 & Infinimux G4

Apparatus linking two networks via RF links

Variety of technologies and approaches

Usually requires operator intervention

800 MHz System Gateway in Vehicle . 150 MHz System OR . . Field Deployed Gateway 18. Level 4: Gateway -- InterfaceRequires Overlapping Coverage Gateway Audio Only Audio, ID, Emergency PTT, etc. 800 MHz System B 150 MHz System A Gateway does not provide interoperability here Gateway provides interoperability here Unit ID Emergency Busy 19. Northern CA Gateway Concept - Radio East Bay RCS P25 I-80 Gateway Network City/County of Sacramento Santa Clara County San Francisco Digital TrunkedPlacer County VHF P25 Trunked State of California Users Conventional Mutual Aid System Departments of JusticeTreasury and Defense 20. Gateway Vision For I-80 Corridor 21. Motobridge Network Overview OMC Server SIP Server Dispatch Workstation Operations Management Location Existing Console Dispatch Workstation Dispatch Only Location . . . . . . . Typical Remote Radio Location Other Remote Radio Locations CustomerIP Network Remote Radio Location1 8-ports/R-GU 22. Fixed Gateway - Smartlink 23. Radio Gateway Unit Interfaces LAN Equipment 4W+E&M/Tone Remote Control Serial (Enables Radio controls, Emergency Notification and Wireless Data) CEB BIM 4W+Tone Remote Control 4W Serial (RS232) RedundantLAN Trunked Conventional PSTN Consolette 1 to 8 interface Connections per RGU Cell LMR System Station RGU 24. Workstation Modules

Enable the operator to quickly create Interoperability between the available resources

Consist of a Workstation Gateway unitconnected to a dispatch console

• Standalone unit or existing dispatch position

Instant Recall Recorder

Radio Module DispatchModule Dispatch ConferenceModule Existing Console LAN Equipment RedundantLAN WSGU 25. Tactical Interoperability

Must be rapidly deployable at any time (24/7)

Should be fully operational within an hour of an incident occurring.

Requires oversight by trained Communications Unit Leaders, as defined within the NIMS, to support equipment deployment.

May be provided through the use of common equipment (common channels, cached radios or shared systems) or a gateway between dissimilar systems and/or radio frequency bands;

Should always be in support of long-term interoperability by building upon or accelerating long-term strategies and efforts.

26. Level 5: System Specific Roaming

Works Via: Radios talk to each other via infrastructure or talkaround using infrastructure from same manufacturer

Advantage:

• Interoperability via the turn of a dial

• Covers large areas seamlessly

• Users can contact agencies across entire coverage area

• Can handle larger numbers of users

• No console intervention required

• All advanced features are available to users

Disadvantage:

• Additional planning and software required on each system

27. Level 5: System Specific Roaming SanFrancisco San Francisco County of Alameda County of Alameda 28. Level 6: Standards-BasedShared Systems

Works Via: All radios built to a standard can talk to each other via infrastructure or talkaround (P25)

Advantage:

• Interoperability via turn of a dial, real time

• Links different vendor systems and subscribers

• Out of the box interoperability, simple to set up infrastructure

• Next generation equipment is backwards compatible to P25 phase 1

• No console intervention required

• All advanced features are available to users

Disadvantage:

• Most expensive solution

29. Level 6: Standards-Based (P25) Shared Systems Zone Controller Alameda County P25 Site San Francisco P25 Site Contra Costa County P25 Site B A A 30. 31. ANSI/TIA/EIA-102 (Project 25 or P25)

Supported by:

National Chiefs of Police

National Sheriffs Association

National Fire Chiefs Association

APCO

DOD, DOJ/FBI, Homeland Security

FCC

Most major LMR manufacturers

32. Project 25 Key Requirements

Project 25 is Digital

• Meets FCC mandate for narrowband operation

• (some non-P25 radios are also narrowband capable)

Interoperability between radio systems within a common band of the spectrum; P25 does NOT afford interoperability for radios that are not on a common band

Compatibility with Existing Equipment

Range Equal to Current Analog Systems

Integrated Voice and Data Services

Forward/Backward Compatibility

Available 800/700/UHF/VHF

Conventional or Trunked Systems

33. P25 System Vision Packet Gate System Management Data Services Zone Comm. Servers IP Gate Internet or PDN PSTN / PBX P25network Placer County MERA/San Mateo County VHF UHF 800 Wideband Site Phase II Site IP Services East Bay RCS/Sacramento 34. 10 minute Break ? Up next: 6 minute video 35. Grant Megatrends 1950 9-11-2001 2003 FUTURE

Local

(Decentralization)

In-dependence

Autonomy

Funding

Priorities

Planning

Regional

(Centralization)

Inter-dependence

Policy

Directives

Funding

Strategies

Governance

Organization

New Urban Threat 36. What Has Changed in thePast 3 Years?

Significantly more funding

Applications becoming more complicated

Creation of the Department of Homeland Security

• Consolidation of Funding to Locals

Significantly faster funding mechanism

• Transfer funds in months instead of years

COPs program is being phased out by the Administration

37. Homeland Security Grant Programs 38. What are the Funding Trends?

State Control of Grants Vs Local Autonomy

Regional Projects Vs Single Jurisdiction Solutions

Risk Assessment Criteria Tied to Grant Dollars

All Hazard Planning Critical

Uniform Equipment Standards

Emergency Management Directors As Key Players

Regional Consensus on Program Expenditures

Increase in HLS funds offset decreased Justice funds

39. Presidential Directive HSPD-7

Calls for an Integrated National Plan for Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources Protection within 1 year (December 17, 2004)

• State and local governments are to be consulted during this process, as are other federal agencies and the private sector

• The plan should include:

• • goals, objectives, milestones and key initiatives;

• • a strategy to identify, prioritize and coordinate the protection of critical infrastructure and key resources;

• • a summary of the specific activities that will be necessary to define and prioritize, reduce the vulnerability of, and coordinate the protection of critical infrastructure and key resources; and

• • a summary of initiatives for sharing critical infrastructure and key resources information, and for providing critical infrastructure and key resources threat warning data, to state and local governments and the private sector

40. Presidential Directive HSPD-8 National Preparedness

Creation of a National Domestic All -Hazard Preparedness Goal

This will be the "Primary Mechanism" for the delivery of Federal Preparedness Assistance awards to States, predicated on adoption of Statewide

Comprehensive All-Hazards Preparedness Strategies

Allocations to be based uponassessments of population, critical

infrastructure and other significant risk factors

Federal preparedness will support State and local entities efforts including planning, training, exercises, interoperability and equipment acquisition

On-going development and adoption of appropriate first responder equipment standards that support nationwide interoperability and other capabilities consistent with the National Preparedness Goal, including the safety and

health of first responders

41. Proposed Homeland Security Bills Eliminate Formula Grants

HR 3266 The Faster & Smarter Funding For First Responders Act (Rep Cox R-CA)

HR 3158 Preparing America To Respond Effectively Act (Rep Turner

D-TX)

Both Bills focus on restructuring the new grant programs within DHS-

ODP

Current formula process guarantees each state & US territory receives a portion of the funds

Establishment of grants based on threat & vulnerability assessments,

and criteria such as the presence of critical infrastructure, key assets or national icons, population and other factors

Both bills would not affect traditional law enforcement, fire, rescue, emergency preparedness programs existing before 9/11

S 1245 allows localities to receive direct funding from the DHS and requires a single office for processing all HSD grant applications

42. ODP Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP)

Integrates Three Programs In A Single Application

State Homeland Security Program

• (SHSP)

• 1.7 Billion

Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program

• (LETPP)

• 500 Million

Citizen Corps Program

• (CCP)

• 35 Million

43. California - HSGP/ODP

FY2003

• Original budget $31,595,000

• Supplemental $83,479,200

FY2004 $133,964,000

14% increase

44. Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP)

California Divided into 58 Operational Areas (OA)

Approval Authority for each OA (Gang of 5)

• County Public Health Officer

• County Fire Chief

• Municipal Fire Chief

• County Sheriff

• Chief of Police

Priorities

• Equipment

• Exercises

• Training

• Planning/Administration

45. Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP)

Distribution Breakdown

• Law Enforcement 20%

• Fire 20%

• EMS 20%

• Discretionary 40%

State Office of Emergency Services Approves Grant Award

Has Your Agency Applied For These Funds???

• Have you been working with your OA?

Has Your Agency Received these Funds??

46. Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP)

Interoperable Communications Plan Suggested

When using ODP program funds in the category of Interoperable Communications Equipment to build, upgrade, enhance, or replace communications systems, grantees and sub-granteesshould develop a comprehensive interoperable communications plan before procurement decisions are made

Plan should clearly illustrate how the proposed effort will lead to

enhanced public safety communications interoperability

Plans should be retained by the jurisdiction/agency and be available

for review by the SAA and ODP

ODP has issued Guidance for Developing Interoperable Communications Plans

47. Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP)

Installation costsfor authorized equipment purchased through ODP

grants

Maintenance contractsfor authorized equipment purchased through

ODP grants and acquired through DHS-ODPs Homeland Defense Equipment Reuse (HDER) Program

Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (MILES)

Training on CBRNE and cyber security equipment by vendors or local entities

Shipping costs for equipment

Sales tax on equipment

48. Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention (LETP)

California FY2004 $39,752,000

Will follow a similar/same process as HSGP in California

49. Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention (LETPP)

Information Sharing to Preempt Terrorist Attacks:

• These funds will allow law enforcement communities to purchase equipment and support efficient and expeditious sharing of information and intelligence that could preempt possible terrorist attacks

Target Hardening to Reduce Vulnerability

• Funds provided under this category will allow law enforcement communities to make vulnerable targets more resistant to attack or more difficult to remove or damage

Threat Recognition

• Funds provided under this category will allow law enforcement personnel to purchase equipment and conduct additional training that assists in further recognizing the potential or development of a threat

Intervention Activities

• Funds provided under this category will allow law enforcement personnel to purchase equipment and conduct activities to further enhance their capabilities to prevent domestic terrorism incidents

Interoperable Communications

• Funds provided under this category will allow law enforcement personnel to purchase equipment to ensure interoperable communications between, and among, law enforcement agencies and other emergency service disciplines such as fire and emergency management

50.

Allowable Planning Costs

Development of and participation in information/ intelligence sharing groups

Point vulnerability analyses and assessments

Development and review of site security buffer zone plans

Soft target security planning (public gatherings)

Development, implementation and review of Area Maritime Security Plans for ports, waterways, and coastal areas

Updating and refining threat matrices

Conducting local or regional implementation meetings

Hiring of full or part-time staff or contractors/consultants to assist with intervention activities (not for the purpose of hiring public safety personnel)

Developing or updating local or regional communications plans

Development or enhancement of cyber security plans

Development or enhancement of cyber risk mitigation plans

Conducting cyber risk and vulnerability assessments

51. Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention (LETPP)

Authorized equipment purchases may be made in the following categories

• Personal protective equipment (PPE)

• Explosive device mitigation and remediation equipment

• Interoperable communications equipment

• Physical security enhancement equipment

• Terrorism incident prevention equipment

• CBRNE logistical support

• CBRNE incident response vehicles

• CBRNE reference materials

• CBRNE response watercraft

• Intervention equipment

• Cyber security enhancement equipment

• Other authorized equipment

52. Urban Area Security Initiative

Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) $725 million (2004)

• $675 Million - Urban Areas

• $50 Million - Metro Rail Transit Grants

53. Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI)- 2004 $7,076,396CA Fresno, CA $7,854,691CA Oakland, CA City and County of Sacramento, Yolo County, City of Folsom $8,024,926CA Sacramento, CA $9,982,442CA San Jose, CA $10,345,691CA Anaheim, CA San Diego County, Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Ocean-Side, Poway, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach and Vista $10,479,947CA San Diego, CA Los Angeles County, Cities of Long Beach, Belleflower, Carson, Compton, Hawaiian Gardens, Lakewood, Paramount and Signal Hill $12,136,091CA Long Beach, CA $15,058,528CA Santa Ana, CA City/County of San Francisco, Alameda County, Marin County, Contra Costa County, Santa Clara County and San Mateo County, and the Golden Gate Bridge District $26,481,275CA San Francisco, CA City and County of Los Angeles, Cities of Burbank, Carson, Commerce, Culver City, El Segundo, Glendale, Hawthorne, Inglewood, Pasadena, San Fernando, Santa Monica, Torrance, Vernon and West Hollywood $28,268,504CA Los Angeles, CA 54. Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI)

Administered by DHSs Office for Domestic Preparedness

Distributed at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security

FY 2004 UASI allocations 50 Urban Areas and 30 Metro Rail Systems

UASI Program Formula - Weighted linear combination of the following factors:

• Population Density

• Presence of Critical Infrastructure

• Current Threat Estimates

Only States are eligible to apply for this funding

To expedite the application and award processes, no budget information and program narrative is required to apply for this grant.

Upon approval of the electronic grant application, the grant will be awarded to the respective state (SAA). This date will be known as the receipt of funds date

55. Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI)

The state's 60 day obligation period must be met within 60 days of the receipt of funds date.

Note: Thereceipt of funds dateis contingent upon submission of a validated Urban Area Assessment and a validated Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy

Urban areas must allocate all funding in support of goals and objectives identified in their Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy and the State Homeland Security Strategy

Mass transit authorities must also allocate according to their Transit Security and Emergency Preparedness Plan developed through this program.

Funding under the FY2004 UASI Program for urban areas and mass transit systems may be used in any of five categories:

• Planning

• Equipment Acquisitions

• Training

• Exercise

• Management and Administrative (M&A)

56. Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI)

Equipment purchases may be made in the following categories

• Personal protective equipment (PPE)

• Explosive device mitigation and remediation equipment

• CBRNE search and rescue equipment

• Interoperable communications equipment

• Detection equipment

• Decontamination equipment

• Physical security enhancement equipment

• Terrorism incident prevention equipment

• CBRNE logistical support

• CBRNE incident response vehicles

• Medical supplies and limited types of pharmaceuticals

• CBRNE reference materials

• Agricultural terrorism prevention, response and mitigation equipment

• CBRNE response watercraft

• CBRNE aviation equipment

• Cyber security enhancement equipment

• Intervention equipment

• Other authorized equipment

57. Interoperable CommunicationsTechnology for the City of Murrieta, CA, Police Department for mobile data terminals; $200,000for the County of Contra Costa, CA, for an integrated justice information system; $250,000for the San Bernardino, CA, Police Department for mobile data terminals; $250,000for Sacramento County, CA, for law enforcement technologies; $300,000for the Sacramento County, CA, Sheriff's Department for IT infrastructure upgrades including the Sheriff's Information Management System; $300,000for the Plumas County, CA, Sheriff's Department for law enforcement technologies; $500,000for the City of Fairfield, CA, Police CAD/RMS Dispatch and Records Project; $500,000for the City of San Francisco, CA, to implement the Justice Information Tracking System; $750,000for the East Valley Community Justice Center in CA; $750,000for the Placer County, CA, Sheriff's Department for law enforcement technologies; $750,000for San Francisco, CA, Bay Area law enforcement technology systems; $1,000,000for the Los Angeles County, CA, Sheriff's Department for law enforcement technologies; $1,000,000for Carlsbad, CA, for the Automated Regional Justice Information System; $1,000,000 58. Directed Appropriations

Awarded by exception You have to specifically ask for it!

• • Need a Customer Champion

• • Need multiple political champions

• • • Chiefs

• • • Mayors

• • • City Council

• • • Congressional Delegations

• • • Senators

• • Takes dedication and time

59. 60. System Governance& Management 61. 62. 63. Governance Committee Action Plan:

Identify Participants with Letter Of Intent (LOI)

Draft MOU or JPA By-Laws

develop a Cost-Sharing Formula (predicated on a system design with projected costs from the Technical Advisory Committee)

Develop presentation(s) for Dept. Heads, elected officials and City Managers / CAO

pursue funding

64. Operations Committee

Identify Operation requirements for communications

Develop SOPs for Tactical Interoperability Communications Plan (TICP) by Sept. 2005

Identify details of the Incident Command System procedures (ICS) to be used by first responders

Identify who the Communications Team members will be during events

Develop presentation(s) for Dept. Heads, elected officials and City Managers / CAO

pursue funding

develop and practice training protocol

65. Technical Advisory Committee

Identify requirements with the OPS committee

Develop equipment requirements based on ICTAP/consultant recommendations (phased implementation)

Identify & pursue funding sources

*Draft RFPs / SOW for digital microwave, master site controller, P25 repeater Sites, gateway, mutual aid repeaters, P25 capable consoles, etc.

*Develop and Implement equipment required for TICP

Develop presentation(s) for Dept. Heads, elected officials and City Managers / CAO

66. Case Studies

Denver / State of Colorado Gateway-Network 1 stLevel 4

Phoenix / Mesa P25 Trunking Level 6

San Diego/ Imperial Shared Trunking Level 5

San Mateo Shared TrunkingLevel 5

Sacramento Shared TrunkingLevel 5

EBRCS (Alameda)Gateway,P25 Trunking, Tac-N-Stack

Levels 3,4,5,6

MERA (Marin County) Shared Trunking Level 5

SECA(Solano County) Gateway / Mutual Aid Levels 3,4

Silicon Valley (SVRIP) Gateway, Tac-N-StackLevels 3,4

Riverside & San Bernadino ?

LARTCS (LA County) Gateway, Mutual aid Level 3,4

67. Emerging CA Regional Networks

Placer County VHF P25 Trunked

Sacramento County 800 Trunked

Alameda / Contra Costa County 700/800 P25 Trunked

Solano County ( SECA) 700/800 P25 Trunked

City of Davis* 800 Trunked

BARTCS VHF/UHF/800 Trunked

LARTCS VHF/UHF/800 Trunked

San Diego / Imperial Counties 800 Trunked

Silicon Valley (SVRIP) VHF/UHF/800 Trunked

Marin County (MERA) UHF T-band

San Mateo County UHF T-band

Riverside County ?

68. Case Study- Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Project (SVRIP) Proof of Concept#1 & #2 Proof of Concept #5 Proof of Concept#3 and #4 E-Comm RegionalMicrowave System PROOF OFCONCEPT PROJECTS BayMACS andFuture Radio 69. Case Studies - SVRIP 70. Case Study: SVRIP - Multiple RIIBs Statewide RIIBs Additional RIIBs 71. Related Legislation

S1274 Improve Interoperable Communications for First Responders Act of 2005

• $400M in 2006

• $500M in 2007

• $600M in 2008

• $800M in 2009

• $1,000,000,000 in 2010

• Funding as necessary thereafter

72. Related Legislation

HR3266 Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act of 2003

HR3158 Preparing America to Respond Effectively Act of 2003

? HERO act, pertains to the 700MHz and establishes a date certain for the vacation of the TV channel spectrum

73. Resources (samples)

FCC.gov / 800TA.ORG

dhs.gov (SAFECOM and or ICTAP)

apcointl.org

Motorola.com

EFJohnson.com

Smartlink.net

TYCO.com (M/A-Com)

Thales.com

Tait.com

74. Portions of this presentation provided, with permission by:

Homeland Security Dept./FCC via websites

SmartLink Communications Inc.

Motorola Inc.

Harris Corp.

Raytheon / JPS

75. Twin Towers-Sept. 11, 2001 Radio Interoperability WAS aFactor 76. Questions? Aki Nakao Director,GSA Randy Hagar Deputy Director, GSA Communications Dept. Alameda County [email_address] (510)208-9789 John Navarette Director, General Services John Downing Communications Services Manager Fresno County [email_address] (559)456-7527