Solving the interoperability problem: are we on the same channel? An essay on the problems and prospects for public safety radio.

• Author: Faulhaber, Gerald R.

1. INTRODUCTION II. WHY INTEROPERABILITY MATTERS III. WHO NEEDS TO INTEROPERATE, IN WHAT CASES? IV. FEDERAL ACTIONS IN SUPPORT OF INTEROPERABILITY V. IS THERE NO HOPE? WHAT ARE THE STATES DOING? VI. CASE STUDY: DELAWARE A. Results in Brief B. Typical Fire Incident C. Interoperability with Other Fire Companies D. Interoperability with Other Agencies E. Interoperability with Other States F. Interoperability with Federal Agencies G. Delaware Summary VII. CONCLUSION VIII. APPENDIX A. Public Safety Communications in Katrina-Class Disasters B. New Technologies for Public Safety Communications I. INTRODUCTION

   Public safety radio communication provides the essential link by which fire, police, emergency medical services ("EMS"), and other emergency personnel respond to life- and property-threatening situations. Communications enables the situational awareness, command, and operational control without which the response of multiple agencies to an emergency is less than useless. Key to this communications capability is interoperability: the capability of first responders from different agencies to communicate during emergencies.

   The lack of interoperability in high-profile emergencies has highlighted public discussion of the issue, creating political pressure in Washington to "do something." These events include the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, the Oklahoma City bombing of the Murrah Building in 1995, the Columbine High School killings in 1999, the collapse of the World Trade Center towers in 2001, and more recently, Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama in 2005. In each case, horror stories about the lack of communications among responding agencies leading to confused and ineffective responses to these disasters flooded the press. And yet, over a decade has passed and apparently little progress has been made in achieving the goal of interoperability.

   This Article addresses the paradox of interoperability. While federal agencies establish programs and studies, exchange memos, and hold conferences such as this to little effect, there are states that have solved the interoperability problem and have stable, longstanding systems that provide emergency voice communications on demand among cooperating agencies, even across state lines. While existing radio systems are far from perfect and no doubt need to be updated and expanded for tomorrow's needs, interoperability can be achieved and has been achieved by a number of states, some of whose systems have been in place for over a decade with quite satisfactory results. What explains this paradox of feverish federal activity with little to show for it, while at the same time some states simply get the job done, paying little attention to the alarums and excursions emanating from Washington? Perhaps it is time for a little interoperability between the Washington bureaucrats and the troops on the ground.

2. WHY INTEROPERABILITY MATTERS

   Public safety personnel respond to a wide range of events. These events can range from a simple auto accident or fire in a residential outbuilding to bank robberies, multi-unit fires, and even full-scale hurricanes. At the low end of this spectrum, a single patrol car, fire engine, or ambulance is sufficient to handle the event. Radio is needed only to dispatch the personnel and for the personnel to report back unusual circumstances and resolution of the incident. For larger incidents, such as an apartment building fire, multiple fire companies may be dispatched to respond to the fire.

   During a larger event, a strict chain of command is established at the scene, with a single designated fire commander communicating with subcommanders and personnel in the field (such as the burning building). Communication is essential not only to ensure that resources are deployed efficiently, but also to avoid uncoordinated rescue efforts which may lead to tragic and deadly accidents. Without communications, coordination in rescue efforts is poor to nonexistent; and the effectiveness of first responders--while heroic--may be useless as well as endanger the lives of others.

   A real-life example illustrates the problem. (1) On April 20, 1999, two students of Columbine High School in Jefferson County, Colorado, started a shooting spree that resulted in fifteen deaths, including the shooters themselves, and wounded dozens of others. Within minutes, local police, firefighters, and paramedics arrived on the scene, soon to be joined by forces from six sheriff's offices, twenty area police departments, forty-six ambulances, and two helicopters from twelve fire and EMS agencies. Students were streaming out of the building, there were wounded in need of immediate medical attention, there were bombs the shooters had planted in the building, and no one knew the status of the shooters (they had killed themselves before the first police arrived). None of the agencies could talk with one another over their radios, which were incompatible and noninteroperable. Within a short time, cell phone towers were swamped with traffic from students, parents, the press, and others and were thus useless to first responders. The existing radio channels to communicate with dispatch centers were overwhelmed with traffic, so there was little awareness at dispatch of the situation at the school. The amazing thing about the Columbine incident is that with hundreds of heavily armed and ready-to-shoot police in a life-threatening melee in which no one knew what others were doing, no one else was killed.

   Radios used by public safety personnel do not share infrastructure with civilian or other state or local users. A typical installation of a Land Mobile Radio ("LMR") system involves a number of high antennas, a dispatch center, and mobile radios on fire trucks, patrol cars, and handheld devices. The radios operate on dedicated frequencies assigned by the FCC; a particularly popular frequency is 800 MHz, but many other frequency bands are also dedicated to public safety and are used by various agencies. Most communications transit the nearest tower; these communications may be to and from central dispatch, or they may be among commanders and firefighters or police on the scene. Communications via the towers may be monitored and recorded by central dispatch for many systems. Some radios have a "talk" or "push to talk" option, which permits direct radio-to-radio communications without using the nearest tower. An emergency situation is typically initiated with an alarm or a 911 call; the operator receiving the call will route it to one or more dispatch centers. In some states, police and fire/EMS have separate dispatchers, while in other states, a common dispatch center is used.

   In many states, the local police and fire departments have budgetary control over their radio equipment as well as the system purchase decision. Different radio systems, especially those using different frequency bands, are usually not interoperable. Achieving interoperability among police, fire, and EMS, both within an operating area and across operating areas, requires planning and coordinated purchases and systems. Fragmented dispatch systems often signal radio incompatibilities and noninteroperability. The story of the response to the Columbine shootings suggests that these incompatibilities may be the norm rather than the exception.

3. WHO NEEDS TO INTEROPERATE, IN WHAT CASES?

   In a typical interoperable system, a fire commander can request the dispatch center to open up a channel to speak with other fire departments that may be arriving on the scene, or to speak with police departments on the scene. This usually is accomplished using separate channels for command and control (speaking with other agency officers) and operational control (speaking with persons under the direct command of the commanders who are actually fighting the fire or dealing with a criminal situation). Multiple channels may be put in use by the dispatch center, depending on the needs of the situation. In order to speak across agencies, such as fire to police, or local police to state police, the typical interoperable system will use "mutual assistance" channels, again assigned by the dispatch center. The general rule appears to be that the fire commander manages the fire, and the dispatch center manages communications.

   As noted above, for small incidents such as an auto accident or fire in an outbuilding, the required response is an individual unit (a patrol car, an ambulance, etc.) and interoperability is not an issue. For larger incidents such as a home or apartment building fire, a number of fire companies may respond, and the fire commander needs full communication capabilities with the other fire companies to gather and maintain situational awareness and control of his or her assets in fighting the blaze. Interoperability is essential for efficient and effective deployment of such resources. Note that interoperability is not appropriate for operational purposes; for example, a firefighter in a burning building wants to talk to his or her commander and not be bothered by nonessential police chitchat. Interoperability is appropriate and essential at the command and control level. It is commanders, not individual firefighters, that should be communicating across "mutual assistance" channels. Failing this, noninteroperability requires the use of suboptimal communication methods, such as swapping radios or sending runners with notes.

   For even larger incidents, such as a train wreck, a factory explosion, or a school shooting, the number of responding units may be over a dozen, drawn from different geographical regions and from different agencies. In many cases, resources from across state lines may be required. Additionally, state level resources may also be required: state police, emergency management personnel, hazardous material ("hazmat") teams, transportation engineering teams, environmental cleanup teams...