ANSI Homeland Security Standards Panel (HSSP)Workshops on Standardization for

Emergency Communications and forCitizen Readiness

Meeting Report

December 1-2, 20048:30 am – 4:30 pm (both days)

Motorola, Inc.Galvin Center Auditorium

1297 E. Algonquin RoadSchaumburg, IL 60196

Day 1: Emergency Communications

1. Opening Remarks

Dan Bart, Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) and ANSI-HSSP Co-Chair, opened the meeting as the workshop moderator and welcomed the participants. He thanked Motorola for hosting the two-day session and providing the meeting space free of charge. He also thanked the three sponsors for the social/networking event that evening: National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), Kontek Industries and Underwriters Laboratories (UL).

Mr. Bart provide a brief walkthrough of the agenda and noted that the purpose of the morning session was to educate and raise issues for further discussion and exploration during the afternoon breakout sessions. A list of attendees can be found in Attachment 1.

2. Background Presentation on the ANSI-HSSP and Standards Process

Mr. Bart delivered a presentation that provided background information on standards, ANSI, why the ANSI-HSSP was formed, and why the workshop approach is being utilized to address homeland security standards needs.

3. Emergency Communications Categories

Mr. Bart gave a presentation on the “four legs” in emergency communications: citizen-to-citizen (e.g., person-to-person, employer-to-employee)

citizen-to-government (e.g., the public makes the E911 call to indicate an emergency)

government-to-government (i.e., public safety agencies communicating amongst themselves)

government-to-citizen (e.g., the public safety agency comes back to the public with alert or warning messages or other governmental emergency information)

He explained that this ANSI-HSSP workshop will cover three of the legs, excluding government-to-government communications which is being covered in numerous other venues (e.g., NIST/DHS Public Safety Interoperability Workshops, SAFECOMM Office of DHS, APCO, etc.).

4. Panel 1: Citizen-to-Citizen Communications

Josh Kiem of Motorola served as the moderator for this panel session and delivered an introductory presentation. The presentation focused on the who, what, when, where, why and how of citizen-to-citizen communications.

The first presentation was on the Wireless Emergency Response Team (WERT). Bernie Malone, Lucent and WERT member, made a presentation on this initiative. Mr. Malone also spoke about the National Association for Amateur Radio (ARRL).

A question and answer period followed that posed further issues for the breakout session to explore.

5. Panel 2: Citizen-to-Government Communications

Jean-Paul Emard of the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) served as the moderator for this panel, introducing the speakers and coordinating the question and answer session that followed.

Maureen Napolitano, Verizon and ATIS Emergency Services Interconnection Forum (ESIF) 1st Vice Chair, gave a presentation on the ESIF initiative.

Robert Sherry, Intrado and member of the NRIC Focus Group 1B, made a presentation on the FCC Network Reliability & Interoperability Council (NRIC).

Gregg Riddle, Western Suburban Consolidated Dispatch Center, gave a presentation on the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO).

Robert Martin, NENA Executive Director, delivered a presentation on the National Emergency Number Association (NENA).

6. Panel 3: Government-to-Citizens Communications

Dan Bart served as the panel moderator and led the question and answer session that followed.

Bill Kalin, Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA) gave a presentation on the Disaster Management eGov Initiative (DM).

Stephen Spoonamore gave a presentation on Send Word Now Communication’s development of disaster communications plans, procedures and systems for federal, state and local agencies.

David Thompson, Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA), delivered a presentation on the Emergency Alert System (EAS).

7. Emergency Communications and the Disabled

Judy Harkins of Gallaudet University delivered a presentation on emergency communications issues for persons with disabilities and a report on the Interagency Coordinating Council on Emergency Preparedness for Persons with Disabilities.

8. Breakout Sessions

Concurrent breakout sessions were held for the remainder of the afternoon in each of the following areas:

Breakout 1: Citizen-to-Citizen CommunicationsBreakout 2: Citizen-to-Government CommunicationsBreakout 3: Government-to-Citizens Communications

The focus of each breakout session was to begin to lay the groundwork for the process of identifying existing standards or work in process (including how to classify/categorize them), as well as how to best identify gap areas where standards are still needed. As with all ANSI-HSSP workshops, the issue of Conformity Assessment (accreditation and certification) was also to be introduced in each breakout. The workshop leader instructed each breakout session to also address the issues of reaching non-English speakers and persons with disabilities.

Following the conclusion of the first day, a social/networking event was held at the Hyatt Regency Woodfield.

Day 2: Conclude Emergency Communications Workshop

1. Conformity Assessment

Gordon Gillerman of NIST gave a presentation explaining conformity assessment and the role that it plays with standards. His presentation concluded with a look at conformity assessment programs which are already linked with emergency communications, and where are they needed, to help insure compliance with standards in this important area.

During the question and answer session, the following areas were discussed: risk assessment – standards development considers it along the way liability issues – SAFETY Act helps limit liability government regulations – single standard would help address differing federal, state and

local regulations incompatibility of equipment – noted that the DHS Office of Interoperability is designed

to address issues of incompatibility of equipment between first responder organizations DHS grant program as a driver for CA – to receive grant funds, must meet standard

It was noted that the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) representative working on communications issues would be a good participant in the next workshop.

2. Results of Breakout Sessions and Discussions

The report from Breakout 1: Citizen-to-Citizen Communications can be found in Attachment 2. During the discussion session that followed the presentation of the report, the following items were discussed:

Using cell broadcast to contact every cell phone in a given area (with an action such as “respond yes if you get this message”)

Noted that report should changed ‘redundancy’ to ‘contingency’ for clarification Regarding employer to employee communication, Sarbanes-Oxley forces large

employers to cover emergency communication to employees, but about smaller companies not covered such as the local drycleaner

Groups cited that should be at the table for future meetings included: AARP, PTA, Grey Panthers, schools, League of Mayors, Rotary or other community service organizations (adding community preparedness), US Chamber of Commerce, NAM, Citizen Corps

Further resources cited included Ready.gov, militia day exercises and Telecommunications for the Deaf Inc. (TDI) grant that was received from DHS to train deaf and hard of hearing for emergency preparedness

The report from Breakout 2: Citizen-to-Government Communications can be found in Attachment 3. Participants commented that the matrix structure developed would be very useful for capturing existing standards, and identifying gap areas, going forward. It was also noted that the focus for this breakout will be on 911 due to familiarity with this number, but consideration will also be given for contingency plan when 911 goes down (e.g., HSOC number).

Groups that were identified as candidates for the next meeting of the citizen-to-government session included: 3GPP2, 3GPP, CTIA, OMA, and UL (from the equipment perspective).

The report from Breakout 3: Government-to-Citizens Communications will be issued shortly.

3. International Dimension to Emergency Communications

A presentation from the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) on the subject of Emergency Telecommunications (EMTEL) was played for participants. It was noted that for more information, go to http://portal.etsi.org/ocg and click on the EMTEL link (although need to contact EMTEL support to get special access password).

4. Workshop Wrap-Up and Next Steps

Mr. Bart summarized the workshop proceedings and thanked everyone for their participation in what he deemed a good start to addressing the state of emergency communications standardization. It was agreed that a future meeting was needed and that it was preferable to co-locate the meetings of the three breakout areas. It was further noted that the preference was to meet in the Washington DC area to help improve attendance to the next session. A meeting in late January/early February will be arranged and details will be communicated to participants (as well as advance preparation materials to volunteers in each of the three breakout areas). It was also suggested that the three breakouts not meet concurrently so that attendees could participate in multiple areas.

Citizen Readiness Workshop

1. Opening Remarks

Mr. Bart, workshop leader, opened the session on citizen readiness. He noted that the ANSI-HSSP served as a partnering organization with DHS for National Preparedness Month in September 2004. Via that effort, the ANSI-HSSP agreed to convene a workshop on individual citizen preparedness to examine the state of standardization in this important area.

2. Review of Initiatives Underway

Three presentations were given on the subject of citizen readiness.

Dean Larson, a member of the NFPA 1600 Technical Committee, delivered a presentation on the “National Preparedness Standard” - NFPA 1600. It was agreed that this was a valuable standard not only for private sector preparedness, but also individual preparedness whether as an employee or member of a community.

Gary Grube of Motorola gave a presentation on Operation Safe America, of which their goals include helping to educate and train for civic preparedness. Mr. Grube detailed the simulation that was held in Atlanta and noted that a report is available from this event.

Mr. Bart gave a presentation on initiatives within the Boy Scouts of America, through his role as Webelos 2 Den Leader from Pack 1071. His presentation included a review of the DHS document that has a checklist for individual preparedness and family communications plan, as well as a grid document that his Webelos pack put together for use by those unfamiliar with the surroundings during an emergency (see Attachment 5).

The workshop participants further discussed issues involved with citizen readiness, including:

Communications redundancy (having multiple phones, two-way radios, etc.) Need for power back-ups School emergency plans (noted that some were already developed in Washington

DC area following the sniper shootings) Cyber security at home Ham radio operators as a resource for emergency communications (FCC website

has database of all the hams - enter zip code and you can find those in your area) Use of scanners to pick up trucker CB communications and other communications

regarding traffic conditions from those people on the road FEMA Digital Emergency Alert System Pilot for the National Capital Region Guide on the special needs of persons with disabilities for emergency planners

4. Role for Standards and Conformity Assessment Programs

Following the discussion of initiatives underway, it was determined that a deliverable of this workshop would be to provide a resource page from the ANSI-HSSP website that provides links to websites with citizen readiness information, as well as to guides and documents already available. The ANSI-HSSP already has a citizen readiness webpage, but this page will be revisited to provide a more comprehensive portal for this area.

5. Workshop Wrap-Up

Mr. Bart concluded the two-day session by once again thanking Motorola for hosting the meeting and providing excellent on-site support, as well as expressing his gratitude on behalf of the entire ANSI-HSSP to all of the workshop participants for their active participation and commitment to the areas of emergency communications and citizen readiness.

Attachment 1: Attendees to December 1-2 Joint Workshop on Emergency Communications and Citizen Readiness

Name OrganizationJean-Paul Emard Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS)

James Turner Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS)

Matt Deane American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

Gregg Riddle Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO)

Connie Desphande BearingPointMichael Studniberg Bell MobilitySharat Chander Cingular WirelessJudy Harkins Galludet UniversityPaula Tucker Galludet UniversityDeanne West IHS/GlobalKathleen McCrea Industry CanadaRobert Sherry IntradoLarry Ciesla IntradoDon Selke Kontek IndustriesJoe Cramer Lockheed MartinBernie Malone Lucent TechnologiesJosh Kiem Motorola, Inc.Mike Pellon Motorola, Inc.Craig Updyke National Electrical Manufacturers Association

Dean Larson National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1600 Technical Committee

Gordon Gillerman National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Robert Martin National Emergency Number Association (NENA)

Heidi Mahy Pacific Northwest National Labs (PNNL)Stephen Spoonamore Send Word Now CommunicationsStephen P Oksala Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE)

David Thompson Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA)

Dan Bart Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA)

Elliot Davidow The JED Group, LLPGary Grube The Safe America Foundation

Pamela GreenlawU.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Neil Lakomiak Underwriters Laboratories (UL)Chris Hasbrook Underwriters Laboratories (UL)Charlie Fiore Urban Health Inc

Bill Kalin US Department of Homeland Security - FEMA Lee Tichner US Department of Homeland Security - FEMA Maureen Napolitano VerizonJack Curran Wheelock, Inc.

Attachment 2: ANSI-HSSP Workshop on Emergency Communications

1. Name of Breakout Session: Citizen-to-Citizen

2. Date of Report: December 1, 2004

3. Participants in Breakout Session:

Josh Kiem MotorolaBernie Malone Lucent (WERT)Michael Studniberg Bell MobilityPaula Tucker Gallaudet UniversityMatt Deane ANSI

4. Description of Breakout Area:

Citizen-to-citizen communications (person-to-person, employer-to-employee, employer-to-employer, etc.) through any communications channel (phone, radio, TV, etc.) in any type of emergency (terrorist attack, natural disaster, etc.)

Methods and planning for communications before, during and after an event

5. Issues discussed and needs identified:

Who do you contact?o Family, enterprise colleagues (who do I work with), local enterprises that

one relies on for services (utilities, doctor’s office, banks, etc.), friends, neighbors/people who live near me, people near me when wrestling with a disaster, NGOs such as the Red Cross, media (e.g., radio)

What needs to be communicated?o “I am alive”o “I can’t reach someone; can you?” o “Meet me, and bring XYZ” o Etc.

When does communication take place?o Real time/during the emergency within the emergency’s perimeter.o Real time/during the emergency to post emergency (e.g., UA93 post

mortem).o Immediately after the emergency during remediation.o Where infrastructure is damaged, until suitable by-pass can be restored

(e.g., 3 days). Where does the communication take place?

o Within the disaster site.o Between the disaster site and local area.o Between the disaster site and long distance.o Between the local area and long distance.

Why does communication take place?o Coordinate rescue and recovery.o Reassure loved ones.o Bring in equipment and report damage/danger.o Assist in prevention of reoccurrence. o Jammed official communications (911)o Communicate with media re: status.

How does one communicate in an emergency?o Cell phoneo Landline phoneo Internet

E-mail (including listserves) Bulletin boards Websites and blogs On-line enterprise recovery systems Internet radio relay system Internet Protocol radio

o Pagero Radio

Traditional Echo link Satellite radio

o Ham Radioo CB radio (to create ad hoc network)o Family Radio Service (FRS)/GMRSo TVo Physical materials (flyers posted in neighborhood, etc.)o Fobs/RFIDo Word of mouth

Challenges/Needs Identified Government can’t compel citizen preparedness in the emergency communications

area Not a lot of money in this for someone to own the issue Educating the public on any citizen-to-citizen communication plan Having a community plan to cover those without access to higher level

technology (e.g., elderly, digital divide) If plan is in place, practicing with some level of frequency to make sure plan

works and people know what to do If plan is in place, making sure that it is current with respect to latest technology

and content (e.g., updated contact lists and numbers) Is there a way to create a list of all people and groups that one needs to contact in

an emergency, including when they will be available for contact? What do we do to bring coverage to victims wherever they are (e.g., reaching

someone in an area without cell service)?

Need to be able to send text (e.g., SMS) to a PSAP and encourage people to use this method for emergency communication (imply standards for automatic communication of location)

Systems overloads during an emergency (e.g., cells, PSAP, etc.) For creation of ad hoc networks, advance availability of CD containing client for

emergency communication (rather than having to download client during an emergency)

Unpredictability of event and resources available (e.g., which communication methods will be knocked out and how will relays work)

Reaching the disabled (hearing, sight, etc.) Language barriers (reaching non-English speakers) Knowing who in your neighborhood is a ham/CB/etc. operator that could assist

with communications Terrestrial enhancement of GPS signals is needed (e.g., inside buildings,

underground)

5. Plan for categorizing and tracking standards (and subsequently gaps) in this breakout area

Who?What?When?Where?Why?How?

6. Identification of existing standards and/or work in process (national, regional or international) that address needs. Include identification of standards developer.

Some starter examples are listed:

Who? DHS caller list from ready.gov Employer policies for reaching employees

What? Japanese “I am alive program” Pre-programmed messages in cell phones (SMS) that can be sent (help, I’m ok,

etc.)

When? Standard for redundancy Standard for operating during a disaster and keeping communication lines up

Where? Standard for being able to communicate from a disaster site

Why? Guideline for alternate to using 9-11

How? Cell phone

o WERT (www.wert-help.org) Ham Radio

o ARRL guidelines for emergency communications TV

o Emergency Alert System 7. Identification of any standards that may require modification/further review to satisfy needs.

To be done through outreach efforts following the meeting

8. Identify any gaps/opportunities for standards to satisfy the needs.

Once the standards/best practices are identified, then look for gaps in the following areas:

Who?What?When?Where?Why?How?

9. Any preliminary recommendations on appropriate venues in which to address these gaps?

Once gaps identified, will identify organizations Neighborhood watch groups to produce neighborhood plans

10. Are there any cross-cutting issues for other breakout session areas? Please identify.

To be determined

11. In order to accomplish the tasks of this breakout session, are there recommendations to form task groups to perform work following the meeting? If so, are there any volunteers to lead these efforts? Please identify.

Need to identify stakeholders in each of the “what” areas to share the standards/guidelines/best practices that they use

Once these are identified, then can look for gap areas

12. What is the plan/timeline for achieving the goals of identifying standards and gap areas and preferred methods of meeting (face-to-face, e-mail, teleconference, others)? Please identify.

E-mail outreach and teleconferences when necessary

13. Are there any groups not present that should be at the table/consulted going forward?

Many to be determined

Attachment 3: ANSI-HSSP Workshop on Emergency Communications

1. Name of Breakout Session: Citizen-to-Government

2. Date of Report: 12/1/2004

3. Participants in Breakout Session:Jean-Paul Emard ATIS jpemard@atis.orgJim Turner ATIS jturner@atis.orgRob Martin NENA rmartin@nena.orgGregory Riddle APCO griddle@wscdc.orgGordon Gillerman NIST Gordon.gillerman@nist.govMaureen Napolitano ESIF Maureen.a.napolitano@verizon.com

4. Description of Breakout Area:Citizen to Government Citizens are trained to dial 9-1-1 in an emergency. The real question is “what standards are available or required to continue and improve communication from a citizen to the government (9-1-1)?”

5. Issues discussed and needs identified: Focus on 911 from citizen to PSAP 10 digit lines (Alarm companies from out of area) third party call centers (onstar, ATX)

6. Plan for categorizing and tracking standards (and subsequently gaps) in this breakout areaThe following table was developed to track existing standards and identify potential gaps in citizen to government emergency communications.

Standards TableACCESS POINT> POTS Cell

PhonesVoIP email Pagers SMS (Short

Messaging System)

Satellite Other (CB, WiFi)

Telephone Relay Service (TRS) or Internet relay service

PSAP Personnel *(training, procedures, certification)3rd party call center Personnel *– (eg OnStar, ATX, TeleAid, TRS) Training & certificationCommunication Devices

TR41.XT1.XXX- 2000

Technical infrastructure J STD 025 ESIF issue 22

Note: all categories need to consider individuals with disabilities and non-English speaking individuals if standards already exist. If gaps exist for these types of individuals those gaps should be noted.Note *: Certification includes testing,

7. Identification of existing standards and/or work in process (national, regional or international) that address needs. Include identification of standards developer.

TBD at such time when all stakeholders fill in the table in 6.

8. Identification of any standards that may require modification/further review to satisfy needs. TBD at such time when all stakeholders fill in the table in 6.

9. Identify any gaps/opportunities for standards to satisfy the needs.

TBD at such time when all stakeholders fill in the table in 6. NRIC VII focus groups on emergency communications will release their findings soon which should be considered when determining the answer to this item.

Need a contingency plan for when PSAP can not take calls.

10. Any preliminary recommendations on appropriate venues in which to address these gaps?

Although gaps have not been identified (see items above), the following groups appear to have lead roles in developing standards that could fill potential gaps:

ATIS ESIF NENA APCO TIA IETF

11. Are there any cross-cutting issues for other breakout session areas? Please identify.

Other organizations may get survey from all three breakout sessions. May need a single rack & stack PSAP training, protocols, and credentialing need to be considered by those entities focusing on government to government

emergency communications. All breakout reports coming out of this workshop need to be cohesive.

12. In order to accomplish the tasks of this breakout session, are there recommendations to form task groups to perform work following the meeting? If so, are there any volunteers to lead these efforts? Please identify.

A call will be made to other interested parties not present at this meeting for their participation.ATIS will coordinate with other breakout session moderators the necessary survey(s) for dissemination.The ANSI HSSP program manager will work with the breakout moderator to collate survey results. A teleconference will be held in order to prepare a “findings” report on the survey results.

13. What is the plan/timeline for achieving the goals of identifying standards and gap areas and preferred methods of meeting (face-to-face, e-mail, teleconference, others)? Please identify.

Timeline is 1Q 2005 due to requirement of synthesizing matrix inputs and NRIC VII recommendations. Teleconferencing is the preferred method of meeting. Email is the preferred method of communicating.

14. Are there any groups not present that should be at the table/consulted going forward?

DHS Operations Center Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers IEEE CEA ITIC COMCARE Alliance (comcare.org) NAED (Emergencydispatch.org) 3GPP2 3GPP OMA UL NEMA IAEM

15. Would considering disabilities change the answer?

Disabilities are considered in the table.

16. Would non English speaking citizen change the answer?

Non-English speaking considerations are in the table.