Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Mike Alagna


Published on

Presentación de Mike Alagna en Diatelco 2010

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Mike Alagna

  1. 1. National Emergency Communications Planning Challenges, Progress & Future What is the role of communications during catastrophic situations? Presented by: Michael Alagna Director Homeland Security Strategic Initiatives & Policy Motorola Washington, DC USA May 2010
  2. 2. Air Florida 1982 Three Mile Island 1979 Oklahoma City Bombing 1995 Space Shuttle Accident 2003 World Trade Center 2001 Hurricane Katrina 2005 Disasters of all types, man made or natural, can strike ANYWHERE and at ANYTIME! Kentucky Ice Storm 2009 California Wildfires 2008 Tornado Outbreak 1999 California Earthquake 1989 Communications among those responding to a natural disaster, terrorist attack, or other large-scale emergency is the essential component to a successful response and recovery effort, and ultimately in the ability of a Nation’s emergency responders to save lives and property.
  3. 3. Significant events and disasters can cause primary communications systems to be lost, diminishing emergency response effectiveness… Planning and implementing comprehensive primary and back-up communications solutions is essential to maintaining critical operations Events Impacting Communications Systems Software failure Spoofing Lightning Loss of back room or electronics bank Interception of signals/ wiretapping Wildfire Loss of infrastructure site facility Radio frequency interference Flooding Loss of infrastructure connectivity Unauthorized use of system resources Extreme temperatures Failure of backup electrical systems Theft of assets Electrical storm Interruption of commercial power Tampering Severe storm (e.g., hurricane, winter storm) Hardware failure Terrorist attack Earthquake TECHNOLOGICAL HUMAN NATURAL
  4. 4. Lessons Learned <ul><li>To ensure preparation for and response to the widest range of crises and incidents, emergency responders must have operable and interoperable emergency communications systems. </li></ul><ul><li>As evidenced by the communications shortcomings experienced during recent events, the US continues to face challenges and make progress on this goal. </li></ul><ul><li>Challenges recognized during these crisis included lack of interoperable equipment at the tactical level, ineffective utilization of available communications assets due to poor resource planning, and an overall lack of integrated command structures. </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>Operational requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Interoperability requirements </li></ul><ul><li>State and regional emergency management plans and policies </li></ul><ul><li>National Response Framework (NRF) and National Incident Management System (NIMS) </li></ul><ul><li>Lessons learned from previous events </li></ul>The National Strategy for Homeland Security Homeland Security Act The National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures and Key Assets The National Strategy for to Secure Cyberspace Homeland Security Presidential Directive 3 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8 National Incident Management System National Response Plan National Infrastructure Protection Plan National Preparedness Goal Homeland Security Strategy & Legislation Presidential Directives National Initiatives Coordinated Approach to Homeland Security Disaster Communications Policy . The Department of Homeland Security has identified communications interoperability as one of the key national priorities to achieve the National Preparedness Goal and has identified emergency response communications as an essential target capability needed to respond to a major event
  6. 6. Preparedness Implementation National Response Framework (NRF) is a guide to how the Nation conducts all-hazards response. National Incident Management System (NIMS) guides all levels organizations to prevent, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of incidents. <ul><li>Places responsibility on Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial governments and agencies for establishing a capability in advance of an incident. </li></ul><ul><li>Includes the private sector, non-governmental organizations, and individual citizens, as appropriate. </li></ul><ul><li>The cycle of preparedness for prevention, protection, response, and recovery missions : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Plan </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Organize and Staff </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Equip </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Train </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Exercise, Evaluate, and Improve </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Emergency Communication Requirements <ul><li>Prediction, Detection and Situational Awareness </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Effective communications, information management, and intelligence sharing are critical aspects of emergency communications. Goal is to foster rapid situational awareness across federal, state and local levels in the event of an incident of national significance. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Warning and Alerts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Alert the central/regional/local authorities responsible for warning the public and issue warnings to the people likely to be affected - broadcast, sound, radio and television, mobile. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Response and Restoration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Coordination of response, restoration and relief activities and restoring command and coordination capability when infrastructure and services have been destroyed. </li></ul></ul>Goal - Implement new programs to foster emergency communications across federal, state and local levels.
  8. 8. Criticality of Communications Across Responder Organizations Critical Information Sharing and Coordinated Interoperable Communications Increases in Complexity to Meet the Requirements of a Responder Community that could Include Tens or Hundreds of Organizations
  9. 9. <ul><li>Emergency communications must be addressed holistically and not through the lens of one agency or department </li></ul>Solving emergency communications challenges requires an integrated approach <ul><ul><li>Horizontal: The need to coordinate within the same government level (e.g., federal-to-federal) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vertical: The need to coordinate across government levels (e.g., federal-to-state) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>External: The need to coordinate outside traditional government agencies (e.g. private sector to government, civil government with military) </li></ul></ul>Local Regional National State A State B Local A Local B Local C Local A Local B Local C Federal A Federal B Federal C Vertical Coordination Horizontal Coordination
  10. 10. National Emergency Communications Plan <ul><li>US Congress required the Department of Homeland Security to create a new Office of Emergency Communications. </li></ul><ul><li>The office centralizes and coordinates emergency communications work at DHS and will promote interoperability among public safety systems at federal, state and local agencies. </li></ul><ul><li>The new office developed a National Emergency Communications Plan to ensure that first responders can communicate during natural and man-made disasters, identify what interoperable capabilities emergency responders need, and include short- and long-term solutions. </li></ul>
  11. 11. Multi-Dimensional Challenge Tools for improving emergency communications must take into account all of the factors critical for a successful solution. Department of Homeland Security Interoperability Continuum
  12. 12. Nationwide Summary of Communications Plans <ul><li>Common Technology Themes </li></ul><ul><li>System of Systems </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Best practice - when a group of independently operating systems—comprised of people, technology, and organizations—are connected, enabling emergency responders to effectively support day-to-day operations, planned events, or major incidents. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Shared Radio Systems </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Optimal level of interoperability. Shared radio systems support multiple Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies, consolidate the communications of multiple agencies. Technical, operational, and financial advantages gained by combining multiple agencies onto a common shared radio system. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Strategic Technology Reserves/Survivability and Redundancy </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing new systems or enhancing existing assets to provide backup communications in the event that critical communications are either disabled or destroyed. </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Project 25 is Becoming Increasingly Important for Grant Funding <ul><li>“ Land Mobile Radio Systems </li></ul><ul><li>All new digital voice systems should be compliant with the Project 25 (P25) suite of standards. This recommendation is intended for government-owned or -leased digital land mobile public safety radio equipment. Its purpose is to ensure that such equipment or systems can interoperate with other digital emergency response land mobile equipment or systems.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ Absent…compelling reasons, SAFECOM intends that P25 equipment will be preferred for LMR systems to which the standard applies.” </li></ul>
  14. 14. Nationwide Interoperability Many states have significant investments in large-scale shared networks 22 Project 25 Statewide Networks 14 Pre-Project 25 Statewide Networks A Key Enabler for Interoperability is the Existence or Planned Deployment of Statewide or Regional Public Safety Networks * conventional <ul><li>Alaska </li></ul><ul><li>Arkansas </li></ul><ul><li>Colorado </li></ul><ul><li>Idaho </li></ul><ul><li>Illinois </li></ul><ul><li>Kansas </li></ul><ul><li>Kentucky* </li></ul><ul><li>Louisiana </li></ul><ul><li>Maine* </li></ul><ul><li>Michigan </li></ul><ul><li>Minnesota </li></ul>Project 25 Shared Statewide Networks <ul><li>Mississippi </li></ul><ul><li>Missouri </li></ul><ul><li>Montana </li></ul><ul><li>Nebraska </li></ul><ul><li>New Hampshire* </li></ul><ul><li>North Dakota* </li></ul><ul><li>Rhode Island </li></ul><ul><li>Virginia </li></ul><ul><li>West Virginia </li></ul><ul><li>Wisconsin </li></ul><ul><li>Wyoming </li></ul>Pre-Project 25 Shared Statewide Networks <ul><li>Connecticut </li></ul><ul><li>Delaware </li></ul><ul><li>Florida </li></ul><ul><li>Indiana </li></ul><ul><li>Massachusetts </li></ul><ul><li>Nevada </li></ul><ul><li>New Jersey </li></ul><ul><li>North Carolina </li></ul><ul><li>Ohio </li></ul><ul><li>Oklahoma </li></ul><ul><li>Pennsylvania </li></ul><ul><li>South Carolina </li></ul><ul><li>South Dakota </li></ul><ul><li>Utah </li></ul>
  15. 15. P25 Statewide Systems - Best Practices A Key Enabler for Interoperability Arkansas Wireless Information Network Alaska Land Mobile Radio <ul><li>Federal, state and local systems linked, shared spectrum </li></ul><ul><li>Very large - harsh environment </li></ul><ul><li>Backwards compatibility with existing equipment </li></ul><ul><li>Integrated voice & data </li></ul><ul><li>17 state agencies, 22 local first-responder agencies, and 11 federal agencies </li></ul>Michigan Public Safety Comm. System <ul><li>Large area 250,465 sq. kilometers </li></ul><ul><li>Variety terrain / population density </li></ul><ul><li>Open standards – multiple vendors </li></ul><ul><li>97% guaranteed mobile coverage </li></ul>Technology components are available and widely deployed but job not complete Governance & training developed and implemented at the local level much progress, but continued incentives needed to drive adoption <ul><li>These networks offer a high degree of interoperability within their geographic coverage areas and can be linked to other networks through gateways. </li></ul><ul><li>Much of the communications equipment used by emergency responders is being upgraded to the Project 25 (P25) suite of standards based digital equipment. </li></ul><ul><li>Recent trends towards regional, multi-jurisdictional and multi-disciplinary approaches can meet the needs of city, county and local users while improving day-to-day mission effectiveness and incident response interoperability when needed. </li></ul>
  16. 16. Minnesota Bridge Collapse <ul><li>&quot;When the bridge collapsed at a few minutes after 6:00pm, the talkgroup load on the system doubled, which was already at a rush hour peak. For the event more than 50+ separate agencies responded &quot;State, County, City, Fire, Medical, Transportation&quot; to deal with the rescue and recovery operations. Cell phone service became saturated and unusable, and even land lines became difficult to come by, the system did have some busies, but when other services were unavailable, the Motorola Trunking system performed.&quot; </li></ul>John Anderson ARMER System Administrator Minnesota Department of Transportation P25 Regional Shared Public Safety Trunked System Facilitated An Effective Response (641,423 seconds of airtime in 6 hours) Why Public Safety Should Control the Design and Operation of Its Networks
  17. 17. Interoperability Progress Timeline – Progress Is Accelerating P25 Ph 2 2:1 TDMA trunking standard completion targeted 2009 2010 Grant funding tied to P25 2008 1999 P25 conventional standard completed Multiple vendors shipping P25 2004 FCC adopts P25 interoperability standard US Government agencies Treasury, Interior, Departments of Defense and Justice specify P25 ISSI standard defined 700MHz NB spectrum opens Multiple CAP testing labs certified Multi-band radios begin shipping - 4 vendors announce products 14+ subscriber vendors ship P25 10+ P25 system vendors Software definable radios begin shipping 1995 2001 700MHz NB spectrum allocated Multiple vendors shipping 700MHz capable radios Government Industry Collaborative Partnership Motorola supports structured interoperability testing, the publishing of formal test reports and led a TIA process improvement eliminating root causes of previous interoperability issues Motorola and other vendors are validating multi-vendor interoperability following DHS and NIST procedures and has proposed procedural enhancements to improve testing efficiency and to accelerate progress
  18. 18. The implementation of an effective, nationwide strategy requires a comprehensive set of near and long-term activities <ul><li>Engage government agencies and the private sector to glean lessons learned </li></ul><ul><li>Robustly define the problem and raise the awareness level of disaster communications needs to policy makers </li></ul><ul><li>Develop a disaster communications system planning methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Identify and respond to high-risk areas requiring immediate solutions </li></ul><ul><li>Identify synergies for federal communications programs to more effectively address the problem </li></ul><ul><li>Coordinate with existing communications working groups </li></ul><ul><li>Develop and implement funding strategies for state and local agencies and regional response structures </li></ul><ul><li>Implement disaster communications policy and program changes </li></ul><ul><li>Examine and respond to needs for standards and spectrum requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Institutionalize disaster communications planning into local, state, and federal disaster response plans </li></ul><ul><li>Provide educational and technical assistance to help agencies perform disaster communications planning and implementation </li></ul>“ Near-Term” Activities Problem Definition and High-Risk Area Solution Development “ Long-Term” Activities Establishment of a Nationwide Disaster Communications Strategy We must be prepared to deploy communications capabilities TODAY , while institutionalizing a culture of integrated disaster planning and policy development over the long-term