Communications Unit Leader (COML) Training By John S. Powell

Transcription

1 The Newsletter of the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Communications Unit Leader (COML) Training By John S. Powell The wildfires that ravaged California and the Western States in the mid-1970s clearly called to the attention of the fire services that a flexible, standardized system to manage incidents from small to large was badly needed by the first responder community. Over the next decade, what is now known as the Incident Command System (ICS), or in its more recent national flavor, the National Incident Management System (NIMS), was born. ICS establishes basic principles, practical tools, and a definitive nomenclature and structure for supporting incident-based emergency response. The fire and rescue services across the country quickly adopted most provisions of ICS, with areas that routinely used interoperability and mutual aid, such as the West with its annual wildfires, moving faster than other areas of the country. ICS is a very natural system for the fire and rescue services to use, since it is almost unheard of that a single firefighter would respond to an incident. However, on the law enforcement side where the majority of responses are by a single deputy or officer, ICS was a much harder sell. Having grown up in the later heydays of Berkeley s annual riots, I note that the structure generally used In This Issue Will Narrowbanding Cost Me System Coverage page 4 Report on Fireground Noise and Digital Radio To Be Issued Soon page 6 NENA Their Success Is Measured in Saved Lives page 8 CAPRAD Re-Sort Online Now page 10 across the country by law enforcement agencies to manage such large incidents generally followed that of the ICS. However, the nomenclature and position descriptions within that structure varied widely, even among law enforcement agencies within the same county or parish, making it difficult to integrate personnel from multiple agencies into the management of a large incident. To address incident management issues in the law enforcement community, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Communications and Technology Committee, with NPSTC member encouragement and support, hosted an ICS Focus Group meeting at IACP Headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, on May 29, Noting that, A lack of coordinated and reliable communications is one of the most-often cited problems in After Action Reports, for major incidents, (to the point that many jokingly say it should just be printed on the After Action Report) this Group examined a number of ICS-based programs around the country. continued on page 11 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials American Radio Relay League Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials - International Forestry Conservation Communications Association International Association of Chiefs of Police International Association of Emergency Managers International Association of Fire Chiefs International Municipal Signal Association National Association of State Chief Information Officers National Association of State Emergency Medical Services Officials National Association of State Foresters National Association of State Technology Directors National Emergency Number Association National Sheriffs Association Canadian Interoperability Technology Interest Group (Associate Member) Telecommunications Industry Association (Associate Member)

2 NPSTC Executive Director April showers bring May flowers, and a lot of work! April and May have been filled with planning for both the narrowband relocation for the 46 public safety organizations impacted by the change in Marilyn Ward the 700 MHz band plan, and by the development of outreach materials to the public safety community regarding the potential for interference from low power television (LPTV) stations of their intention to deploy in 700 MHz. NPSTC s 700 MHz Advocacy Working Group developed a package of materials alerting public safety to the potential problem and provided a template letter for agencies to notify LPTV stations and other supporting materials. NPSTC s Committees have been meeting and working out ways to make these transitions easier on the users and we hope you will go to the website and download the documents that have been provided. NPSTC Governing Board member, Chief Charles Werner, for his appointment as the SAFECOM Executive Committee Chairman. Charles is active in NPSTC as a representative of the International Association of Fire Chiefs and we are happy to have him serve the community in this important role in SAFECOM. NPSTC is committed to support the SAFECOM program and Chief Werner. The NPSTC meeting in Washington, D.C. June is going to be very exciting. The list of presentations and attendees is very impressive: Industry Canada will be doing a presentation, OEC will present the NERP, FEMA will discuss the Integrated Public Alert Warning System (IPAWS), and much more. Check the agendas on the meeting section of our website, www. npstc.org. Come in person or call into the discussions. We will be following the agenda closely, making it easier for attendees on the telephone to monitor items of interest to them. As part of its outreach initiatives, NPSTC leaders also gave a presentation at the International Association of Chiefs of Police Law Enforcement Information Management Conference on May 7 in Nashville. The presentation highlighted some of the key activities of NPSTC and how it can be a key partner in strategic planning. Many of you are familiar with the SAFECOM program and all of the good work that is being done at the Department of Homeland Security s Office of Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) and the Office of Emergency Communications (OEC). NPSTC leadership has been working on several initiatives that will have a long-term positive impact on interoperability through the SAFECOM program. The newly revised Communications Unit Leader (COML) program is being taught just in time for the Olympics. OEC is also working hard to complete a National Emergency Response Plan (NERP) that will bring together the work done nationally to develop Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans (TICPs) and Statewide Communications Interoperability Plans (SCIPs) for interoperability. Our congratulations go to Page 2 npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008

3 REGULATORY UPDATE Canada Examines 700 MHz Band Industry Canada, the regulatory authority of the Canadian government responsible for managing its spectrum, has commenced a proceeding examining issues in the 700 MHz band. In its Notice No. SMSE , the agency describes changes the U.S. has made to its 700 MHz public safety segment. It noted that the U.S. had altered its frequency plan to accommodate public safety broadband operations. It recognized that this significant restructuring led to relocating the previously designated narrowband voice channels and, as a result, the Canada and U.S. frequency plans were no longer aligned. The Notice expressed concern regarding the divergence of the two nations 700 MHz public safety segments. It emphasized an immediate need to deploy narrowband public safety systems and suggested that narrowband operations take priority over broadband operations. The Notice also invited comment on the viability of accommodating wideband operations. NPSTC submitted comments emphasizing that the length of the Canadian/U.S. border and the long history of shared concern and cooperation between the two nation s federal, provincial/state, and local agencies should resound within each nation s policies and rules addressing the 700 MHz public safety radio bands. The green field character of the 700 MHz band, that it is not burdened by the competing interests that converge in the other bands, provides enormous opportunity to improve how crucial public safety services are carried out. Aligned policies and technical rules between the two governments will allow cross-border agencies to communicate directly with each other. Parallel rules will provide more intense and efficient use of the spectrum and broaden the competitive market for radio equipment. It can ameliorate to a significant degree the combination of factors present in other bands that stifle efforts to improve communications in the border regions. NPSTC stated that an alignment of the two nation s 700 MHz bands will lead to more effective delivery of public safety services and the protection of emergency service officers and personnel. NPSTC endorsed the priority of providing narrowband channels. Yet it urged caution in postponing decisions regarding the technical rules ensuring coexistence between narrowband and broadband operations. NPSTC noted that much wider requirements can be fulfilled and the increased benefits obtained through advanced services. Future Canadian broadband operations and those in the U.S. border regions will rely on rules and technical standards for protections that will allow broadband and narrowband operations to coexist. The rules should also preserve a wide range of technology choices. NPSTC also related the increasing and unique challenges U.S. public safety agencies in the border regions face to improve their communications systems or to remedy a gap in coverage or transmission quality. The challenging licensing process in the border regions includes the need to coordinate channel use and obtain approval from Canada. Agencies frequently encounter varying protocols and procedures, misunderstood policies, and lengthy processes. NPSTC suggested that the 700 MHz band provided an opportunity to move to a better understood and more efficient cross-border coordination process that is able to respond more effectively to public safety agency needs. npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Page 3

4 Will Narrowbanding Cost Me Radio System Coverage? By Sean O Hara The Engineer in Me I have a confession to make; I am an engineer. As such, I have this burning desire to dive into the bowels of technical detail until I have driven everyone around me into a type of numb stupor leaving nothing but glazed eyes in my wake. Hence, I find myself in a quandary. How do I handle the highly technical topics of narrowbanding and radio coverage? Further, how do I do so at a high enough level that system owners and operators can actually understand the impacts of narrowbanding well enough to make the best choice for themselves? How we will handle this is fairly simple. I will leave most of the technical detail out of this summary, and provide it on the NPSTC website in the near future. This will satisfy my editors (glazed eyes), as well as my dearest engineering comrades. The Narrowbanding Mandate With the May 13 release of the 4th Memorandum Opinion and Order (MO&O) on Narrowbanding (FCC Docket 97-87), the FCC has, to a large extent, clarified the timelines for a transition to narrowband technologies. These timelines will affect all MHz and MHz Private Land Mobile Radio (PLMR) licensees and system operators, many of whom have already started the long and expensive process of replacing and/or updating their radio equipment to meet this mandate. In the MO&O only a single firm date was set by the Commission. Here, a date of 2013 was solidified as the deadline for a transition to 12.5 khz technologies, or technologies that offered functional equivalence to 12.5 khz technologies. However, this was clearly seen to be an interim step to the second date, a yet to-be-determined date where licensees must meet a more stringent efficiency of 6.25 khz technologies, or technologies that offered functional equivalence to 6.25 khz. The FCC made it clear in this MO&O that they understood that full 6.25 khz-equivalent technology exists now, and that Project 25 Phase II technologies are on a development path for availability in the near future. Given this, all public safety licensees should give consideration to their eventual transition to 6.25 khz technologies especially given the long and fixed budget cycles that typically constrain public safety system deployments. A Discussion on Coverage The discussion here focuses on a subject near and dear to our hearts the topic of radio coverage. There has been much discussion in the community lately regarding the impact that the narrowband transition will have on radio system coverage. This is a serious topic, since radio coverage is what connects our first responders, both in daily operations as well as times of crisis. Unfortunately, radio coverage is one of the most hard to define topics there is, and one that I have found is much more often misunderstood than understood. It is an area where users live, while engineers count their dbs (decibels). There are few topics that are more important. To discuss changes in coverage, I have decided to utilize what we engineers call technical jargon. Hence I will use the following coverage definitions for changes to coverage: Little Impact: Little if any coverage loss experienced. No additional radio sites required to maintain coverage reliability. Some Coverage Loss: Some coverage loss experienced. Some additional radio sites required to maintain coverage reliability in areas where coverage has dropped significantly. Significant Coverage Loss: Significant coverage loss may be experienced. Many additional radio sites may be required to maintain coverage reliability in areas where coverage has dropped significantly. Sounds simple, doesn t it? Well, it isn t; it is just simplified (perhaps oversimplified). continued on next page Page 4 npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008

5 continued from previous page In reality coverage is still complicated, and the definitions above must be taken in the proper context. You (or your trusty engineer) should always look at your system at some point and count the dbs. Flat areas and rugged areas react differently to changes in technology, and most of the impacts are system specific. Furthermore, one concept that is not specifically addressed here is the users perception of coverage when going from analog to digital systems. Suffice it to say that if you talk to enough users you will get the impression that the beauty of digital is in the ear of the beholder. Where Does Technology Fit In? From the previous discussions it should be clear that at some point this article will talk about radio technologies, i.e. where do they fit into the big picture? The answer is simple; operations at the various stages of the narrowband transition are supported by different types of technologies. For purposes of this discussion, I will only focus on two technology tracks analog Frequency Modulation (FM) and digital Project 25. The reader should be aware that many more radio technologies do exist, but we cannot examine them all here. It is important to note that analog FM and digital Project 25 are very different. One difference that will become apparent is that the audio quality of the FM signal is more directly tied to its bandwidth. The type of technology deployed follows a rough deployment timeline. Currently, most systems operate on 25 khz technologies. For this discussion we will note that these are primarily analog FM technologies. Operations on these technologies will need to transition to more efficient 12.5 khz technologies by the year At present there are also many systems operating on 12.5 khz technologies. These systems mainly consist of either analog FM or Project 25 Phase I radio technologies. Operations on these technologies do already meet the 2013 transition date, but will still need to eventually transition to 6.25 khz operations. Outside of 700/800 MHz bands, there are very few technologies in use today that meet the 6.25 khz narrowband restrictions. Analog FM can meet this spectrum efficiency, as will Project 25 Phase II once it is available for deployments. Where Do I Stand? Table 1 (see page 7) lists the most common technology transitions that occur during the narrowbanding process. As can be seen, these coverage transitions are from analog to digital systems as well as digital to digital systems. Further, the table also covers technology transitions that occur as direct cutovers from 25 khz to 6.25 khz technologies, as well as interim transitions from 25 khz to 12.5 khz to 6.25 khz. From the table it is seen that coverage loss is primarily experienced along technology tracks that attempt to maintain analog FM operations. Although this is arguably the least expensive track to take, the coverage decreases slightly at first, then rather dramatically down the road. The impact of this type of planned transition is that it may end up costing more than expected as more sites will likely be required to maintain system coverage levels without degradation. The digital technologies hold up well, due to their ability to add error correction and efficient voice compression, an ability that analog FM lacks. Further, Phase II Project 25 is being developed specifically such that coverage losses do not result when the increase in spectrum efficiency is obtained. However, as previously noted, there are often changes in the users perception of coverage due to the more abrupt transition from coverage to no-coverage that is exhibited by digital technologies. Summary This discussion is intended to provide a high-level understanding of the types of coverage impacts that system owners and operators will face when managing their technology transitions in response to the FCC narrowbanding mandates. Although the discussion was necessarily limited to analog FM and Project 25 technologies, it is still useful to see that the coverage losses experienced are far worse when attempting to maintain analog FM operations throughout the narrowband transition. In the near future, a more technical brief will be provided at the Sean O Hara serves as a lead engineer in support of New York State s Statewide Wireless Network (SWN) Program, and is a member of NPSTC s Technical Support Team. npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Page 5

6 Report on Fireground Noise and Digital Radio To Be Issued Soon By Charles Werner In late 2006 and early 2007, the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) began to receive reports of firefighters experiencing unintelligible audio communications while using a digital two-way portable radio in close proximity to the low-pressure alarm of their self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA). Other common fireground noise, including powered tools, apparatus, and personal alert safety system (PASS) devices, appeared to affect voice intelligibility. The IAFC Board of Directors directed the Communications Committee to establish a Digital Problem Working Group (DPWG) to investigate the problem. Preliminary testing under an IAFC-developed protocol indicated a problem. IAFC alerted its members to this potential issue, asking them to contact the Digital Problem Working Group if they had experienced similar issues. The DPWG noted that while many fire departments are using digital radio systems with success, there may be interference to voice transmission in the presence of common fireground noise. Also noted was the fact that the problem is not specific to any one manufacturer. In May 2007, the DPWG, held its initial meeting in Fairfax County, Virginia. Representatives from the Fire Service; the Institute for Telecommunication Services (ITS), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); and industry participated in the meeting. Industry representation included radio equipment and SCBA manufacturers. A year later, in May 2008, the DPWG met at the NIST laboratory in Boulder, Colorado, to learn the results of the objective testing performed over the previous 9 months and to develop best practices and recommendations to protect firefighters in high-noise conditions. Best Practices and Testing Subcommittees Identified As its first task, the Digital Problem Working Group assembled two subcommittees to investigate the intelligibility problem and develop potential solutions. Page 6 npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 The Best Practices Subcommittee was charged with developing recommended practices that radio users can implement to minimize or eliminate the distortion problem. Some of the suggested practices are technical or procedural considerations that organizations should consider adopting to maximize user safety and efficiency. The subcommittee strongly emphasizes the comprehensive and continuing training radio users must have to successfully use communications equipment, particularly in a high-noise environment. Another important recommendation is that the fire service should be actively involved in the design and development of requirements for any communication system implementation from the beginning. Radio systems that are designed and constructed without consideration of fire department requirements frequently do not meet the needs of fire and rescue users. The Testing Subcommittee was charged with conducting tests in a laboratory environment to objectively quantify the nature of the distortion problem and identify potential solutions and their effectiveness. During the year, the Testing Subcommittee collaborated with ITS/NIST engineers as they conducted the testing of communications systems. Following analysis of test results, both subcommittees strongly recommend that standards and guidelines should be developed for scenario-based user training utilizing their communications equipment. Currently no relevant standards exist. But beyond this issue, the subcommittees recommend that a broader review of standards and a gap analysis that addresses factors of communication systems including, but not limited to, intelligibility, use practices, maintenance, and alignment should be performed. There is currently no intelligibility performance standard for public safety radio communication systems. continued on next page

7 Table 1: High Level Coverage Impacts of Various Technology Transitions Transition From Analog FM Wideband (25-kHz, 5 khz Deviation) Analog FM Wideband (25-kHz, 5 khz Deviation) Analog FM Wideband (25-kHz, 5 khz Deviation) Analog FM Wideband (25-kHz, 5 khz Deviation) Analog FM NPSPAC (12.5-kHz, 4 khz Deviation) Analog FM NPSPAC (12.5-kHz, 4 khz Deviation) Analog FM Narrowband (12.5-kHz, 4 khz Deviation) Digital Project 25 Phase I (12.5-kHz, FDMA) Transition To Analog FM NPSPAC (12.5-kHz, 4 khz Deviation) Analog FM Narrowband (6.25-kHz, 2.5 khz Deviation) Digital Project 25 Phase I (12.5-kHz, FDMA) Digital Project 25 Phase II (12.5-kHz, TDMA) Analog FM Narrowband (6.25-kHz, 2.5 khz Deviation) Digital Project 25 Phase I (12.5-kHz, FDMA) Digital Project 25 Phase II (12.5-kHz, TDMA) Digital Project 25 Phase II (12.5-kHz, TDMA) Coverage Impact Some Coverage Loss Significant Coverage Loss Little Impact Little Impact Some Coverage Loss Little Impact Little Impact Little Impact Fireground Noise continued from previous page Evaluating Communication Systems: NIST Testing The test to evaluate the intelligibility of communication systems evaluated three systems. Two vocoder technologies the baseline Project 25 (P25) Full Rate vocoder and the P25 Enhanced Full Rate vocoder were compared against a 25 khz analog FM pair under nine different noise conditions. In three of the background noise conditions, testers also evaluated 12.5 khz analog FM to determine whether or not that might be a viable alternative to meet the FCC s narrowbanding mandate while still providing a required level of intelligibility to the user. The communication systems were tested in the following conditions. No mask, background noise No mask, fire truck pump panel Mask, with no background noise Mask, two PASS alarms In-mask low air alarm Mask, rotary saw cutting metal garage door Mask, chainsaw cutting wood Mask, 2½ hose with fog nozzle Amplified mask, rotary saw cutting metal garage door ITS engineers, in collaboration with the Testing Subcommittee, decided upon a protocol known as the Modified Rhyme Test (MRT) to evaluate the behavior of digital and analog communication systems in the presence of fireground noise. In this type of test, each tester listens to a sentence asking the individual to select a word from a list. The intelligibility of a communication system can be difficult to quantify since it is a subjective issue, relying on an individual s ability to discern words. The listeners ability to select the correct word is averaged across a panel of test listeners and produces a percentage of intelligibility score. The NIST report and a full report of the DPWG including analysis of the test results, suggested best practices, and recommendations will be issued later this summer. Charles Werner is Chief of the Charlottesville (VA) Fire Department and DPWG Chair. npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Page 7

8 Member SPOTLIGHT NENA Their Success Is Measured in Saved Lives The National Emergency Number Association (NENA) has an essential job and the message on their website states it so well. We are NENA. We are more than 7,000 members and 47 chapters strong a membership dedicated to saving lives. We work every day on a single, yet vital, mission: providing an effective and accessible service for North America we are a membership dedicated to making and emergency communications work better, and measure our success in the lives that are saved by each day. NENA s mission is to foster the technological advancement, availability, and implementation of a universal emergency telephone number system: In carrying out its mission, NENA promotes research, planning, training, and education. The protection of human life, the preservation of property, and the maintenance of general community security are among NENA s objectives. In late 2007, NPSTC added NENA s voice to the Governing Board. Working closely with like-minded public safety groups is imperative to improve emergency communications, Jason Barbour, President, NENA, said. In this age of rapidly advancing communications technologies, partnerships involving all relevant parties in emergency communications, from those associations focused on to those traditionally focused on land mobile radios, are essential. As technology continues to converge, so must the collaborative efforts of public safety groups. Synonymous with Saving Lives A 9-year old boy in the San Diego area was lauded recently for calling and saving his mom s life while she was having a seizure. Fighting back tears and in a trembling voice, the boy called when his mother collapsed. Fire officials said his actions are a role model for callers. Adapted from NENA s, Everyday Heroes. Page 8 npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Well known to American citizens, is the recognized call for help. According to NENA s website, the push for the development of a nationwide American emergency telephone number came in 1957 when the National Association of Fire Chiefs recommended a single number to be used for reporting fires. In 1967, the President s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice recommended the creation of a single number that can be used nationwide for reporting emergencies. By 1968, AT&T introduced the number to report emergencies. For a time citizens continued to rely on dialing O and seeking assistance from local operators, but when AT&T was broken up into seven regional operating companies, no-cost access to human operators began to become increasingly unavailable and cities and counties began to perceive a real need to spend the money to create call centers to support the emergency number. Jerry Bleck, one of the very early members of NENA from Illinois, and still a director, reports that Illinois Bell Telephone was a leader in the development of sophisticated systems. Public safety officials wanted to see their modern system and under the leadership of Roger Reinke, a National Telecommunications Information Administration official, the first national conference was arranged in 1977, supported by federal funds. When federal funds dried up in 1981, the public safety planners felt that a national focus on implementation was critical, but a new organization needed to assume responsibility. That organization was NENA. These annual meetings in fact did go on with the first NENA Conference held in 1982 in St. Charles, Illinois, says Bleck. NENA s website provides a wealth of information. In addition to sponsoring training and educational resources in the operational and technical arenas, as well as information for the public, NENA has a strong legislative arm. Its agenda for the 110th Congress calls on lawmakers to comprehensively address multiple issues, including federal funding for continued on next page

9 continued from previous page 9-1-1, advancement of E9-1-1 for all technologies that benefit all consumers, promotion of next generation 9-1-1/emergency communications, and to ensure and all other entities involved in emergency response are included in homeland security policy and grant programs. Legislative Issues NENA is a staunch supporter of pending legislation before the United States Congress (HR and S.1250) that would provide federal matching grants to states for system upgrades and impose conditions on such aid through a national program office. NENA has partnered and led a number of initiatives to advance the deployment and enhancement of wireless E9-1-1 technology. NENA has worked with the General Accounting Office (GAO) and its own Strategic Wireless Action Team (SWAT) to forecast and report needed actions to improve the deployment of wireless E For several years NENA has been leading aggressive IP development efforts for NENA strongly encourages rapid solution based E9-1-1 development for Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) applications. NENA is supporting development methods among public safety, industry, and key stakeholders to deliver voice-enabled calls through an evolved network and system including non-traditional communications for those with disabilities. NENA firmly believes that service should not be an afterthought for communications providers, but rather an active part of service design and development. To learn more about NENA, visit NPSTC Technology Education Working Group Identifies First Educational Products By Stephen Devine The NPSTC Technology Education Working Group is developing educational products on topics that have been identified within the public safety community as needing more exposure. Initially, these products will focus on the following issues. Land Mobile 101 This work product on the basics of public safety radio systems is intended to provide a much-needed tool for public safety communications personnel who are responsible for the operational elements of public safety communications to learn more about the technical aspects of their radio systems. Integration of Public Safety Broadband 4.9 GHz and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 5.9 GHz Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) A documentation of the synergies being identified between public safety 4.9 GHz and Intelligent Transportation System-related broadband applications in the FCC s 5.9 GHz Dedicated Short Range Communications band. Next Generation 911 A primer for Next Generation and the operational and technical changes it could bring to public safety. NPSTC Documentation of the FCC s Docket (700 MHz public safety) NPSTC is attempting to categorize and streamline the history of FCC Docket (700 MHz public safety) by consolidating information already on its website into a consolidated, easily interfaced, and chronologically based series of presentations that will promote an either casual or in-depth review of the proceeding s history. Navigating the FCC s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) A tutorial outlining the tools and procedures necessary to promote awareness and action regarding the submission of comments to the FCC, how to view documents issued by the FCC, and how to view comments submitted by others regarding the FCC s rulemaking procedures within its Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). Stephen Devine is Chair of the Technology Education Working Group. npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Page 9

10 CAPRAD Re-Sort Online Now By Ron Mayworm In August 2007, the FCC issued a Report and Order that, among many other things, moved together the public safety 700 MHz narrowband segments which had been previously separated. These segments included general use, state license, interoperability, low power, itinerant, reserve, and other channels. This reconfiguration caused the co-channel and adjacent channel separation constraints and combiner spacing constraints used in generating the nationwide Computer Assisted Pre-Coordination Resource and Database System (CAPRAD) general use frequency sort, completed in 2003, to be violated in significant portions of the country. Since many of the FCC-approved 700 MHz regional plans, and even more of those still in the planning stages, rely on the CAPRAD sort for their frequency allocations, a solution was needed quickly. With funding from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), administered through the Sheriff s Association of Texas, the National Regional Planning Council (NRPC) requested that the Syracuse Research Corporation (SRC), which had performed the original 2003 sort, be contracted to complete an updated sort. During January 2008, all Regional Planning Committee (RPC) chairs were contacted and given the opportunity to select the bandwidth, combiner spacing, and minimum channel allotment criteria to be used in their region. Tthe default choice was 25 khz bandwidth, with 250 khz combiner spacing, with a minimum of 5 channels per county (as used in the 2003 sort). Several nationwide conference calls were held to help the chairs to understand the merits and implications of the options. On March 26, 2008, engineers from SRC presented their results to the executive committee of the NRPC. Thirteen of the 55 regions chose to re-sort in some manner other than the default, and existing license assignments in 6 regions were honored. Improved computer algorithms and computation power allowed for better spectrum efficiency than in The executive committee approved the results, which have subsequently been uploaded into the on-line CAPRAD database, where they are now available for use by the RPCs. NRPC hosted a CAPRAD refresher training at its full meeting in Arlington, Virginia, in late April, which was attended by representatives from 27 of the 55 regions. More training, including on-line sessions, will be coming soon. RPC chairs can contact CapradAdmin@TEQ-Services.com to obtain their CAPRAD passwords. The regional planning community sincerely appreciates the hard work of many individuals that made this update to CAPRAD occur so quickly. Ron Mayworm, Region 49, is Vice Chair of the PSST Liaison Committee and Chair of the National Planning Assistance and Coordination (NPAC) Working Group. Page 10 npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008

11 COML Training continued from page 1 Of note was the California Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS), a mirror of ICS customized for the Golden State as established by the California Legislature after the disastrous Oakland Hills Fire of SEMS training is required of all California first responders by statute, and disaster reimbursement is directly linked to having met that requirement. More pertinent to this article, the Focus Group also recognized that at a major incident, wireless communications involves: Coordinating potentially hundreds of channels and talkgroups across multiple bands Diverse work groups Remote functions and remote locations Planning for worst-case implementation, and, perhaps most importantly, Engaging the Communications Unit Leader (COML) quickly as an event unfolds. Thus, this Focus Group meeting finally began to engage the law enforcement community more directly in the use of ICS, particularly refining the various positions within the Communications Unit which is part of the ICS Logistics Section. The Communications Unit developed in response to the need for a cadre of individuals who are knowledgeable, trained, and certified to support communications during incidents managed under ICS. Under the leadership of the COML, the Communications Unit is responsible for integrating wired and wireless communications, and ensuring that operations are supported by communications wherever necessary. The COML must understand ICS and local response systems to support the efforts of the Incident Command team. The COML is responsible for both operational and technical aspects of communications during an incident. Operational aspects include establishing field communications between the Incident Command Post (ICP) and dispatch center(s) using incident dispatchers, tactical dispatchers, or radio operators; monitoring field communications; and monitoring effective use of radio channels/talkgroups. Technical aspects include determining the appropriate radio channels/talkgroups to be used, programming and deployment of cache radios, interference mitigation, etc. Another critical role for the COML is planning for the next and subsequent operational periods to ensure adequate resources are available to support future incident needs. After several years, the importance of the Communications Unit (and particularly developing the position description and training for the COML) became a priority within other areas of local, state, and federal government, including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the SAFECOM Program. Notably, the 2005 DHS Grant Guidance included a requirement that all designated Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) regions develop a Tactical Interoperable Communications Plan (TICP). States and territories without a UASI were required to designate a metropolitan area and work with them to likewise develop a TICP. An initial requirement for the TICP included identifying COMLs for the region. With the realization that few COMLs actually existed anywhere in the country, with virtually none outside of the wildfire community, this requirement was subsequently relaxed to only require that TICPs identify potential candidates for COML training once it became available. While position descriptions for COML had been developed by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) over the past three decades, they were directed exclusively toward managing large wildfires and using conventional (non-trunking) equipment in the VHF and UHF bands. Since 2005, it became apparent that the NWCG course and related certification processes needed to be expanded to include all hazards. Using the NWCG documents as a core, wildfire-specific terms and requirements were removed and all-hazard terms were substituted. At the same time, DHS identified the COML as a critical role within NIMS. Through course development work funded by its Office for Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC), supported by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Incident Management Systems Integration Division continued on page 12 npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Page 11

12 COML Training continued from page 11 (IMSID), and with direct input from the local, state, and federal emergency response community, DHS initially identified issues that needed to be addressed prior to the successful establishment of a process to train, qualify, and credential incident communications support staff. DHS funded this initial development of the COML course in In February 2008, 30 public safety practitioners representing multiple disciplines across the nation met in Seattle, Washington, to discuss the COML course. Representatives from the IMSID and recently established DHS Office of Emergency Communications (OEC) also attended the meeting. The information below highlights the next steps and recommendations that resulted from that meeting: All-Hazards Type 3 COML Course The All-Hazards Type 3 COML course will be made available for use by localities and states in late spring or early summer of Incidents are typed by complexity/duration/size and resources by capability, with a smaller number representing a larger incident or capability. A Type 5 incident is one normally encountered within a single jurisdiction, while a Type 1 incident is a major, long-term mutual aid event. A Type 3 event is of a size or complexity that it would normally involve response from a number of jurisdictions within a region and is anticipated to last more than a couple of operational periods. 2. Fundamental public safety communications technology, supervisory, and personnel management skills. These include, but are not limited to knowledge of local communications and communications system frequencies and spectrum, technologies, knowledge of local topography, knowledge of system site locations including knowledge of local, regional, and state communications plans, and knowledge of local and regional Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans, if available, and communications and resource contacts. Also important, knowledge of system site locations including knowledge of local, regional, and state communications plans, and knowledge of local and regional Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans, if available 3. Completion of the following training courses, IS-700, IS-800b, ICS-100, ICS-200, and ICS-300. (For a description of these courses, visit the COML page at Communications Unit Awareness Course All ICS command and general staff positions should understand basic Communications Unit issues and terminology. It was determined that an awarenesslevel, independent study course needed to be developed. This course was developed and is being finalized. As with the Type 3 COML course, the intent is to have the Communications Unit Awareness course go through IMSID review. Assuming there are no major changes during the IMSID review, it is estimated this course will be available and online by summer continued on next page Course prequalifications follow: 1. A public safety communications background with exposure to field operations; this experience should be validated by the authority who supervised the student. Page 12 npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008

13 continued from previous page Policy Recommendations In April 2008, at a final review of the draft COML training course, the public safety practitioners made a number of recommendations. Additional supporting material for each of the recommendations can be found on the COML page at In brief, the practitioners recommend the following: 1. A task book should be used to document qualifications and describe the functions and tasks of an ICS position. 2. To ensure quality control of the documentation process associated with this training program, the approval authorities for related requirements should be limited to a small pool of supervisory personnel or individuals with relevant experience. 3. All-hazards Type 3 COMLs should participate in a full-scale exercise, incident, or planned event every 3 years to keep their qualifications up to date. 4. In lieu of, and until such time as a National Registry and/or federal certification body is established, states should collect documentation on student qualifications. 5. To qualify as a lead instructor of an All-hazards Type 3 COML course, the candidate should be a qualified All-hazards Type 3 COML, have attended an All-hazards Type 3 COML train-the-trainer course, and have served as an adjunct instructor through at least one full All-hazards Type 3 COML course. When released by DHS to Congress in mid-july, it is also anticipated that certification and training for ICS Communications Unit positions (starting with the COML) will be a high priority within the National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP). In conclusion, while identified as a critical need for well over a decade, the development of position credentialing, descriptions, qualifications, and requirements for key positions within the ICS Communications Unit have been long delayed. It is only through the efforts of a number of dedicated and key individuals, most of them representing the local first responder community, that we will finally see these courses begin to roll out over the next several months. John Powell is Chair, NPSTC Interoperability Committee, and a Member of the COML Working Group. npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Page 13

14 Staying On Top of Reconfiguration Activities By Brett Haan As the 800 MHz band reconfiguration program passes the June 26, 2008, deadline, there continue to be many crucial activities that licensees, their vendors, and Sprint Nextel need to complete to successfully reconfigure the 800 MHz band and alleviate interference to public safety communications systems. This article provides details about some of these activities and provides links to additional information that should assist those involved in reconfiguration. Requests for Waiver The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in a Public Notice dated January 17, 2008, required all licensees whose reconfiguration efforts would extend beyond the June 26 deadline to file a request for waiver. Licensees that had not completed Frequency Reconfiguration Agreement (FRA) negotiations with Sprint Nextel by the filing deadline filed a request for interim waivers. Licensees with a signed FRA filed a standard request for waiver that described the expected completion dates for implementation activities. Hundreds of licensees submitted requests for waiver, and the 800 MHz Transition Administrator, LLC (TA) created a waiver request lookup tool on its website ( documents/waiver_requests.asp) to enable licensees to confirm the receipt of their request. The TA is contacting all licensees that have not submitted a request for waiver and have not completed reconfiguration to determine if the licensee must file a request for waiver. The TA will also ask for additional information about when a request will be filed (if necessary). If you have not yet filed a request for waiver, but require additional time beyond the Border Update In May 2008, the FCC released an order detailing the band plan for the U.S.-Canada border regions. It establishes a 30-month transition period for completion of rebanding in the U.S.-Canada border regions. The TA will continue to reach out to affected licensees with guidance on topics such as planning, negotiations, preparing for implementation, and other activities in support of reconfiguration. Canadian border licensees are encouraged to proceed with non-frequency-specific planning activities. June 26 deadline to complete reconfiguration, visit the TA s website ( for additional information about how to file a request for waiver. NOTE: If you filed a request for an interim waiver, please remember that after you have a signed FRA, you must file a final request for waiver that includes a proposed timetable for completing rebanding. Implementation Planning Session Participation To date, the TA has conducted more than 20 Implementation Planning Sessions (IPS) to develop comprehensive reconfiguration implementation schedules for NPSPAC and related Expansion Band licensees within a NPSPAC region. The TA conducts IPS with licensees, their vendors, consultants, and Sprint Nextel to facilitate joint planning and coordination at a regional level. Approximately 294 licensees operating more than 518,000 radios have attended these sessions through May Topics covered include implementation activities, durations, dependencies between licensees, and the identification of issues, risks, and action items. The key building blocks for developing the regional implementation schedule are the licensees individual reconfiguration timelines, including the schedule for Sprint Nextel to clear replacement frequencies. These sessions have been successful in building a common view among all stakeholders of licensee interdependencies and scheduling needs, and they have enabled parties to reach an understanding on the timing of clearing and surrendering frequencies for those licensees that are ready to transition to the new channels. Attending an IPS has assisted licensees to understand the specific steps they must take and continued on next page Page 14 npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008

15 continued from previous page factors to consider during implementation. Many licensees have found the sessions to be useful, as groups of licensees within a NPSPAC region are assembled with their selected vendors and Sprint Nextel to coordinate their reconfiguration efforts. A licensee from Illinois told the TA that getting everyone in the same room to talk through issues really helped. I finally got to meet people that I had been talking to for the last 2 years but had never met, the licensee said. It was good to know that we were not in it alone. It s also much better to get things done eyeball to eyeball rather than trying to figure things out from a distance. In the coming months, the TA expects to conduct Implementation Planning Sessions in Georgia, Florida, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, among other regions. The TA will continue to hold sessions in other regions as more licensees complete FRA negotiations. As these sessions are planned for your region, you will be contacted with a meeting invitation and logistics. It is critical that you participate in the session to facilitate the development of a comprehensive schedule for the region. Change Notices As your planning or implementation activities proceed in accordance with the work described in your TA-approved Planning Funding Agreement (PFA) or FRA, there may be a need for changes to the scope, cost, or schedule of those activities. These changes may occur at any point in the planning and reconfiguration process. If a change to the activities and costs contemplated by your PFA or FRA is needed, you must submit a Change Notice notifying Sprint Nextel and the TA of the changes. Change Notices apply to costs and other circumstances not known to licensees at the time the PFA or FRA is signed, but do not apply to costs that were considered and rejected during FRA negotiations. Change Notice Forms and instructions can be found on the TA s website at We encourage you to review these and other resources or contact the TA if you have questions. Brett Haan is the 800 MHz Transition Administrator Director. If you have any questions or need further specific assistance, please contact the TA at comments@800ta.org or at Channel Clearing Requests As implementation activities move forward, there may be some licensees that are ready to implement but have not gone through an IPS. A licensee whose FRA does not have an implementation schedule and who can reconfigure its infrastructure in advance of the IPS and independently of other systems (such as statewide mutual aid networks) should discuss with Sprint Nextel the date by which the channels in the new NPSPAC band need to be made available. If the licensee and Sprint Nextel are not able to reach agreement on a date, the licensee may submit a Channel Clearing Request Form. Once this form is submitted, Sprint Nextel must clear the necessary spectrum within 60 days of the request. npstc spectrum Volume 8, Issue 2, June 2008 Page 15