Strategic Plan Bay Area SUASI Interoperable Communications Project

Strategic Plan

Bay Area SUASI

Interoperable Communications Project

January 30, 2008

Bay Area SUASI Strategic Plan


January 30, 2008

Bay Area SUASI SUASI Strategic Plan draft (1-30-08)_1.doc i

Authors

Bob Simmons, Manager

BearingPoint 4435 Shearwater Court Pleasanton, CA 94566 Tel: 925-218-4213 Fax: 925-369-7322 E-mail: [email protected]

John Walker, Manager

BearingPoint 6399 South Fiddler's Green Circle, Suite 400 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 Tel: 970-980-3271 E-mail: [email protected]

FG Dowden, Manager

BearingPoint 1250 Poydras Street Suite 950 New Orleans, LA 70112 Tel: 318-229-3203 Fax: 318-985-2744 E-mail: [email protected]

Lincoln Unruh, Manager

BearingPoint 6399 South Fiddler's Green Circle, Suite 400 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 Tel: 720-339-4387 E-mail: [email protected]

Version History

Draft Final

Description Version Draft Date

Author Approval Date

Approver

Initial Draft 1.0 1-30-08 Bob Simmons

This document is protected under the copyright laws of the United States and/or other countries as an unpublished work. This document contains information that is proprietary and confidential to BearingPoint, Inc. and/or affiliates or its technical alliance partners, which shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed in whole or in part without BearingPoint's express written permission.

© 2008 BearingPoint, Inc. and/or its affiliate(s) (Unpublished). All rights reserved.

BearingPoint® is a registered trademark of BearingPoint, Inc., or its affiliates, in the United States and other countries.

mailto:[email protected]





January 30, 2008

Bay Area SUASI SUASI Strategic Plan draft (1-30-08)_1.doc ii

These materials supported by Award No. 2006-0071 awarded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Office of Grants

and Training (G&T)

The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the

Department of Homeland Security.



January 30, 2008

Bay Area SUASI SUASI Strategic Plan draft (1-30-08)_1.doc iii

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 1 2. Vision Statement .............................................................................................................. 1 3. Current State of Interoperability ...................................................................................... 2 4. Future State of Interoperability ........................................................................................ 3 4.1 Governance .............................................................................................................3 4.2 Standard Operating Procedures...................................................................................4 4.3 Technology ..............................................................................................................5 5. Strategic Plan ................................................................................................................... 8 5.1 Goals ......................................................................................................................8

5.1.1 Governance .................................................................................................................................................. 9 5.1.2 Standard Operating Procedures ............................................................................................................... 9 5.1.3 Technology ................................................................................................................................................. 10

5.2 Action Plan ............................................................................................................11 5.2.1 Governance ................................................................................................................................................ 11 5.2.2 Standard Operating Procedures ............................................................................................................. 14 5.2.3 Technology ................................................................................................................................................. 18 5.2.4 Funding ....................................................................................................................................................... 30 5.2.5 Phased Implementation Schedule ......................................................................................................... 32

6. Long Term Planning ........................................................................................................ 38 7. Review Cycle................................................................................................................... 38 Appendix A – Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions.......................................................A-2 Appendix B – Spectrum Roadmap.........................................................................................B-1 Appendix C - Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Templates ...........................................C-1



January 30, 2008

Bay Area SUASI SUASI Strategic Plan draft (1-30-08)_1.doc 1

1. Executive Summary

This Strategic Plan is designed to provide a five-year view regarding the development of interoperable communications in the Bay Area. It focuses on three core elements of Interoperability: Governance, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), and Technology. This plan coupled with training and exercises and day-to-day usage form the complete interoperability process as defined by the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum1.

The current state of interoperability in the Bay Area indicates that there are opportunities for improvement in all areas of interoperability, both at the City/County level and at the regional level. Considerable momentum has been generated recently in establishing interoperable communications and this plan will sustain that momentum in achieving region wide interoperable communications.

The future state of interoperability points to an integrated system of communications known as the Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network or ARDIN. ARDIN encompasses a governance model that provides a centralized three-tiered structure for Bay Area decision-making and planning, while still allowing local and regional communications systems to control their respective systems. ARDIN will also use common SOPs related to the National Incident Management System and Incident Command System (NIMS/ICS) supporting day-to-day, task force and mutual aid types of interoperable communications. ARDIN will also use standards-based wireless technology, Project 25 or P25, to facilitate communications within Regional Communications Systems (RCS). These Regional Communications Systems, the East Bay RCS, Silicon Valley RCS, and West Bay RCS will link together to form the backbone of ARDIN. A conventional overlay radio system, BayLink, will overlay the entire Bay Area to facilitate communications between agencies not affiliated with an RCS.

In planning for interoperability beyond the five years encapsulated in this plan, ARDIN will encompass the ten Bay Area Counties with expansion beyond the Bay Area up through the I-80 corridor towards Sacramento and their planned migration to P25.

The Strategic Plan includes Goals and Action Plans necessary to implement to future state described. The goal and action plans are broken out into specific tasks relating to Governance, SOPs, and Technology and includes timeframes, projected funding requirements, performance measures, and defines the person/agency responsible to complete the task.

2. Vision Statement

The Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network (ARDIN) will provide a regionwide standards-based communication system that supports first responder communication needs for local and regional agencies, and interoperates with state and federal public safety first-responders and designated public service organizations operating within the ten county Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network. The system will enable first responders to communicate on demand, when needed, in real time, when authorized, across disciplines and jurisdictions, during day-to-day, task force, mutual aid operations and major incidents.

1 http://www.safecomprogram.gov/NR/rdonlyres/65AA8ACF-5DE6-428B-BBD2-7EA4BF44FE3A/0/Continuum080106JR.pdf



January 30, 2008


3. Current State of Interoperability

Currently there are eight formal governance agreements representing various counties, municipalities, agencies and systems within the Bay Region. However, these agreements lack a larger regional communications interoperability focus. They are designed primarily for managing resources within their local/regional jurisdictions, disciplines and immediate service area and do not provide for coordination of voice communications issues and operational requirements with higher and adjacent organizations or disciplines. In the event of a terrorist event or catastrophic natural disaster, the current governance structures and the systems which they represent would encounter significant challenges in sustaining regional cooperation and managing the voice communications operability and interoperability requirements of the region.

With respect to standard operating procedures, US Department of Homeland Security findings2 for the San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose UASI regions, noted that additional steps should be taken by the UASI agencies to ensure that standard operating procedures supporting communication interoperability were fully instituted and exercised at the command and responder levels.

Beyond these reports, BearingPoint found that agencies in the Bay Area, in general, had limited communication interoperability directives in place and did not train and exercise at the levels required to support communication interoperability capabilities.

The individual counties within the Bay Area, with few exceptions, currently have some degree of intra-county interoperability with respect to technology. Whether through common channels or a shared infrastructure, most agencies within a county have the capability to communicate with each other at some level.

However, this capability does not automatically translate to sufficient capacity to deliver enough talk paths for effective interoperability. Most counties have interoperability capability only through shared or multi-band repeated channels which is a point of concern. The capacity for these shared channels may be sufficient for routine interoperability needs but cannot carry the anticipated traffic load that would be seen during a major multi-jurisdictional or multi-discipline event.

Interoperability between counties, (i.e. regional interoperability) is in the nascent stages of development with few examples of agencies having the ability to communicate across borders and interoperate within neighboring counties or regions. This is in the early stages of change with implementation of the interoperability initiatives highlighted in this assessment regarding the Regional Communications Systems (EBRCS, WBRCS, and SVRCS). With the deployment of these Regional Communication Systems, interoperability capability will increase in these areas to Level 5 on SAFECOM interoperability continuum for technology. Because these initiatives are also trunked regional systems, they will increase the capacity and flexibility to handle increased traffic load seen during a major multi-jurisdictional or multi-discipline event

Other counties, such as Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma have made investments in studies regarding the move to next generation systems. Solano County is in the process of deploying an interim solution to

2 Department of Homeland Security Tactical Interoperable Communication Scorecards Summary Report and Findings, January 2007



January 30, 2008


provide interoperability until it can form a strategic plan for deploying a regional shared system or possibly join other regional systems.

The individual entities of the Bay Area SUASI are at various levels of interoperability as defined by the SAFECOM Continuum. The SUASI has made significant progress in moving forward with a regional vision for interoperability considering its recent formation as a single UASI region. However, it is important to keep in mind that interoperability is a continuous process of evaluation, implementation, testing, and reevaluation. The reduction in the number of disparate initiatives and integration of existing programs will speed the development of integrated communications throughout the region. With the implementation of the Strategic Plan, with its distinct applications of Governance, Standard Operating Procedures, and Technology, the region will move faster and more efficiently to a higher level of compatible interoperability as outlined by the SAFECOM Continuum.

4. Future State of Interoperability

4.1 Governance

The vision of a standards based shared “system of systems”, which can provide seamless operability and interoperability within the Bay Area and eventually along the I-80 corridor to Sacramento, involves a significant investment in cost and time, collaboration and agreement on technical solutions, agreements for the sharing of resources and cooperation in developing common standard operating procedures and protocols. A governing body which will support the Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network (ARDIN) and like governing bodies which support the local/regional communications systems (EBRCS, SVRCS and WBRCS) and effectively collaborate with each other is required for the successful implementation of the vision.

Properly configured regional governance, based on the core functions outlined in the SAFECOM guidance and which leverage the existing governance agreements, would provide leadership and accountability for voice communication operability and interoperability. It would also support a “system of systems”

approach for interoperability within the Bay Area; allow local and regional governance structures to continue to manage their respective systems and operations and assist in modification of existing agreements, where necessary, to allow for connectivity to the ARDIN. Finally, the flexibility of governance structures and their enabling written agreements, which

provide for periodic reviews and updates, will allow the governing body to make operational, technical and funding decisions based on real world requirements or changes in technology and support the vision for a system of systems.

Statewide Communications Interoperability Plan (SCIP)State Level

Figure 1 - Governance Vision

City Level

County Level

Regional Level ARDIN

WBRCS

San Francisco

EBRCS

Oakland

SVRCS

San Jose

Other Regional Governance

Bodies

Napa, Santa Cruz, Solano,

Sonoma

Other Regional Communications

Systems



January 30, 2008


4.2

This Strategic Plan will implement governance initiatives which will create a centralized point for Bay Area decision making and planning, while allowing local and regional communications systems to control their respective systems. It will provide the conduit for the alignment of operating procedures with NIMS/SEMS, the standardization of common operational protocols and procedures and the development of compatible operational communications interoperability plans.

Standard Operating Procedures

Common standard operating procedures supporting day to day, task force and mutual aid interoperable communications is the future of Bay Area communications interoperability. Common standard operating procedures would include exercise and training, for each agency within each County and within each Regional Communication System. An interagency communication process baseline report (also known as a business process baseline report) is completed for each County and/or Regional Communication System defining processes required to achieve interoperable communications within and between agencies. The baseline report includes information regarding the numbers and types, capability and capacity of each of the communication pathways identified by first responders as needed in an incident response. The report data provides information on available responder communication technology to manage incidents and the technology capacity and capability needed by responders to complete their assigned missions and incident objectives and technology gaps that may hinder response. Effective procedures support multi discipline and jurisdictional use of the Incident Command System/SEMS, ICS Communication Units and Unit Leaders are available 24/7, multi discipline and jurisdictional use of plain language is practiced, day-to-day use of interoperability capabilities is common place, producing an effective interoperable communication system. Public Answering Points (PSAPS) properly use console patches, gateways solutions and radio system fleetmaps and channel plans in day to day intra-agency and inter-agency tactical communications. PSAPs and Emergency Operations Centers (EOCs) have Continuity of Operations Plans (COOP) in place that ensures continued operation of the local and regional public safety communications nets during an incident response. A regional resource identification and management system is in place providing emergency responders the ability to locate, track, and request needed resources to meet the incident missions and objectives. Directives establishing a Multi-Agency Coordination System (MACS) are in place coordinating existing mutual aid and emergency management plans related to multi-agency coordination centers at the local, regional, state and Federal level. The directive facilitates the reporting of activities, coordination of operational activities and the development of a common operating picture, during an incident. An operationally focused communication interoperability plan, is in place for each County and Regional Communications System and serves to provide operational detail in preparing agencies and communities to respond to “all hazard” incidents, catastrophic events and support day-to-day usage of interoperable communications.



January 30, 2008


4.3 Technology

The future network for the Bay Area consists of three P25 regional networks covering 80% of the regions populated areas to form the core for the Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network, or ARDIN. The individual networks are linked via the P25 ISSI protocol over a microwave ring system, BayLoop, which encompasses the Bay Area. The end state of ARDIN will be a hybrid network utilizing both 7/800 MHz as well as VHF spectrum. Field units will be tri-band (150/700/800 MHz) and be able to access talkgroups using either band, and the infrastructure will route the audio to the appropriate base station for transmission.

A conventional multi-band repeater system, BayLink, will overlay the 10-county Bay Area to provide complementary services to the P25 networks. BayLink will give conventional and non-P25 users the ability to communicate across bands on a common platform. In later phases, BayLink will connect to ARDIN via ISSI to allow non-P25 and P25 users to communicate via designated interoperability talkgroups.

In planning for interoperability beyond the five years encapsulated in this plan, ARDIN will encompass the Counties of Napa, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma with expansion beyond the Bay Area up through the I-80 corridor towards Sacramento and their planned migration to P25.

Several factors come into play in the determination of strategic direction for interoperability technology. Chief among them is the threat of natural disaster such as earthquake. The Bay Area has several major faults that run through major population centers (see Figure 4 - Bay Area earthquake faults). Earthquakes caused by these faults have the possibility of causing major damage. The US Geological Survey predicts a

62% risk of a 6.7 magnitude or greater earthquake in the next 32 years.

San Jose

Oakland

Sonoma CountyNapa County

Solano County

Marin County

Alameda County

Santa Clara County

Contra Costa County

San Mateo County

Santa Cruz County

San Francisco County

LegendBayLoop

Bay Area Cities

RCSEBRCS Cities

SVRCS Cities

WBRCS Cities

Bay Area Counties

RCSEBRCS Counties

SVRCS Counties

WBRCS Counties

Figure 2 - ARDIN Concept Diagram

In addition to natural hazards, the Bay Area is home to the oil refineries of the East Bay, regional airports and seaports, defense installations, and major tourist attractions, each a possible target for a terrorist threat. These targets are typically in located in the higher populated areas of the Bay Area.



January 30, 2008


The highly populated areas of the Bay Area also tend to have more incidents of civil disturbances due to higher population density. These events require a large law presence for crowd control and order restoration. These factors point to the frequency or magnitude of interoperability events.

Other factors that need to be considered are more technical in nature. Being able to communicate between frequency bands on common channels is a challenge in the Bay Area as well as between different technology platforms. This applies not only between Bay Area first responders, but also to their state and federal partners. What types of systems would be needed to address this issue?

Network operability is also a crucial factor in interoperability planning. If a system does not provide the needed coverage, capacity, or capability needed for first responders to perform their mission, their ability to interoperate with other agencies is also compromised. Operability should be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that first responder needs (coverage, capacity, and capability) are met so that they may effectively perform their mission and interoperate with neighboring agencies as the need arises.

There are also regulatory concerns that affect interoperability planning. Mandatory narrowbanding is required to be completed by January 1, 2013 for VHF and UHF users as well as 700 MHz spectrum clearing and 800 MHz

rebanding.


Solano County

Marin County

Alameda County

Santa Clara County

Contra Costa County

San Mateo County

Santa Cruz County


LegendBayLoop

WestLink

SouthLink

NothLink

Figure 3 - BayLink concept diagram

All of these factors need to be addressed when determining priorities for the seven interoperability initiatives currently in use or planned in the Bay Area. As noted in the Interoperability Assessment3, the seven initiatives fell into one of three categories: Microwave Network, P25 Regional Communications System, or Multi-Band Repeater System.

The Microwave Networks consist of the Bay Area Digital Microwave Network, E-Comm (part of SVRIP), and Tri-MAC. These networks and the other microwave networks that support the Regional

3 SUASI Regional Interoperability Assessment and Gap Analysis – January, 2008



January 30, 2008


Communications Systems provide a transport layer to send and receive voice and data to various radio sites and dispatch points throughout the Bay Area regardless of the type of interoperability system used.

The P25 Regional Communications Systems (RCS) consist of the East Bay RCS covering Alameda and Contra Costa Counties; the West Bay RCS covering Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties, and the Silicon Valley RCS covering Santa Clara County. Together these three initiatives cover approximately 80% of the population of the Bay Area (see Table 1 - Bay Area Population Table) along with the counties with highest population densities.

The Multi-band Repeater Systems consisted of the DOJ “25 Cities” Project, BayMACS (part of SVRIP), and the Solano County SECA system. These systems operate in a conventional mode and provide a “lowest common denominator” to allow units operating on differing frequency bands and from different agencies to talk to each other over a wide-area common infrastructure.

By deploying the P25 subsystems of ARDIN first and following up with the conventional overlay system of BayLink immediately thereafter the Bay area moves toward level 5 interoperability as measured on the SAFECOM continuum for technology. The conventional overlay system will then provide a gateway to the P25 subsystems for additional interoperability capabilities. Using the same systems for day-to-day use as the primary mode of interoperability is echoed in the SAFECOM Statement of Requirements:

“While the PSWAC Final Report defined these modes of operation (day-to-day, task force, mutual-aid) to stress the need for communications interoperability among the first responders, the majority (as much as 90 percent) of the communications

usage falls under the day-to-day operations mode. Thus, the communications systems must support the day-to-day operations with all the same performance features that may be required to support the other modes of operation. Unless the systems provide the first responders with seamless functionality regardless of the mode

San Jose

Oakland


Solano County

Santa Clara County

Alameda County

Marin County

Contra Costa County

San Mateo County

Santa Cruz County


LegendMisc. Faults

Calaveras Fault

Hayward Fault

Green Valley Fault

Rodgers Creek Fault

San Andreas Fault

Bay Area Cities

Bay Area Counties

"Bay Area Earthquake Faults

Figure 4 - Bay Area earthquake faults



January 30, 2008


of operation, the first responders will not use their systems efficiently or effectively, especially when they need to operate in the task-force and mutual-aid modes.4”

County July '06 Population Estimate5

% of Bay Area

Population

Persons per sq. mile

(density)6

Santa Clara County 1,731,281 24.1% 1304

Alameda County 1,457,426 20.3% 1957

Contra Costa County 1,024,319 14.3% 1318

San Francisco County 744,041 10.4% 16635

San Mateo County 705,499 9.8% 1575

Sonoma County 466,891 6.5% 291

Solano County 411,680 5.7% 476

Santa Cruz County 249,705 3.5% 574

Marin County 248,742 3.5% 476

Napa County 133,522 1.9% 165

Total 7,173,106

Table 1 - Bay Area Population Table

5. Strategic Plan

The Strategic Plan outlined in following sections will provide a comprehensive framework for ensuring that public safety interoperability needs are met within a 5-year timeframe.

5.1

Goals

The Strategic Plan addresses interoperability through Governance, Standard Operating Procedures, and Technology, and has the following goals:

4 Source: SAFECOM Statement of Requirements for Public Safety Wireless Communications and Interoperability, Version 1.1, January 26, 2006

5 Source: US Census, July 2006. (www.census.gov) 6 Source: US Census, December 2000. (www.census.gov)



January 30, 2008


5.1.1 Governance

1) Establish a charter for an Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network (ARDIN) and for each regional communications system or “system of systems’ which:

a. Identifies vision, mission, goals and objectives

b. Identifies the roles and responsibilities of members

c. Establishes by-laws, voting and membership requirements

d. Establishes and publishes timelines, preliminary funding and the criteria for the prioritization and distribution of grant funds.

2) Establish appropriate formal agreements (MOU’s, MOA’s, JPA’s) between agencies and jurisdictions in the Bay Area Region which commit respective agencies to support voice radio communications operability/interoperability, acceptance of national standards, development of funding plans and participation in a decision making structure which will manage the respective communication systems.

3) Establish or transition existing governance structures to a three tiered governance structure for the Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network and regional systems which centralizes decision making authority for the Bay Region and decentralizes the local decision making authority for regions/ counties within the Bay Area. The authority of the regional governance structure should be narrow in scope and related only to defined operability/ interoperability communication activities, such as equipment standards, training and evaluation, directives controlling compliance with NIMS/ICS standards and allocation of funds received for the region (for example the allocation of SUASI funds .

4) Establish executive sponsors from the major governmental jurisdictions within the SUASI Region.

5) Create a permanent San Francisco-Bay Region Communications Coordinator position within the Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network to provide administrative support and to coordinate the activities of the governing body and manage day-to-day issues within the Bay Region.

6) Expand SUASI liaison with state and federal agencies to leverage existing interoperability opportunities, experience, resources and continued support for the Region.

5.1.2 Standard Operating Procedures

1) Implement a well trained and properly staffed Communications Unit Leader and Communication Unit in local and regional agencies.

2) Complete an interagency communication process baseline report (also known as a business process baseline report) for each agency, operational area and region and defines processes required to achieve interoperable communications within and between agencies.

3) Implement an interoperability focused, all hazard, all discipline, communication plan that facilitates communication interoperability with other compatible plans. The plan should support the building of larger, compatible plans or links to other plans, contiguous or non-contiguous to the region’s or agency’s plan. The plan should allow the plan’s stakeholders to remain in control and retain local accountability through the plan’s governance board.

4) Develop a Continuity of Operations Plan that ensures continued operation of local and regional public safety communications nets during an incident response



January 30, 2008


5) Implement a regional incident resource management system to provide emergency responders the ability to locate, track and request needed resources

6) Implement Multi-agency coordination centers to facilitate the regional reporting of activities, coordination of operational activities and the development of a common operating picture, during an incident

5.1.3 Technology

1) Deploy a digital microwave network to support interoperability efforts in the ten-county Bay Area. The network, referred to as BayLoop, will link the various interoperability projects across the ten-county Bay Area, enabling features such as seamless roaming and the ability for dispatch centers to contact their neighboring dispatch centers to exchange information.

2) Deploy a Project 25 system covering the five most populous Bay Area Counties. The Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network (ARDIN) will initially consist of three Regional Communications Systems (RCS), the East Bay RCS, the West Bay RCS, and the Silicon Valley RCS. These systems will link over BayLoop via mutually agreed to methods to form a “system of systems”.

3) Deploy a conventional overlay system, BayLink, to facilitate mutual aid capabilities with field units of differing frequency bands or technologies. BayLink would be an aggregation and expansion of the existing DOJ “25 Cities”, BayMACS, and the Solano County multi-band repeater systems.

BayLoopSan

MateoNapa Sonoma EComm Tri-MACMarin

EBRCS Solano SF

EBRCS WBRCS SVRCSARDIN

NorthLink WestLink SouthLinkBayLink

Figure 5 - Bay Area Interoperability System Relationships



January 30, 2008


5.2

Action Plan

5.2.1 Governance

1) Leadership and Decision-Making structures

The Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network (ARDIN) and each jurisdiction within ARDIN will establish a standard three tiered practitioner driven governance structure made up of an executive committee/ approval authority, steering committee and advisory committee(s)/ working groups in accordance with SAFECOM guidance. The ARDIN governance structure will be narrowly focused and provide for the overall direction and standardization of policies, protocols, procedures and equipment acquisition within the Bay Area and with state and federal agencies. The regional/ county governance structures (EBRCS, WBRCS, SVRCS and separate counties) will control and manage the day to day operations and sustainment of their respective systems and ensure that the interoperability goals of their respective regions and ARDIN are met. The primary objectives of the governance structure will be:

1) Establish a standards-based P-25 infrastructure which will allow seamless roaming throughout the ten-county region and provide for connectivity to outside systems.

2) Plan and provide future funding to support the management and maintenance of the systems.

3) Facilitate training in order to maximize the capabilities of the systems.

4) Provide leadership and decision making authority for ARDIN and regional communications systems.

The executive committee/ oversight body will be made up of local elected and appointed officials empowered to make decisions and commit assets on behalf of their respective organizations. Executive sponsors will be identified and included at the executive/ decision making level of the governance structure. The steering committee/ advisory committee will be made up of representatives from the respective agencies within the region (s), meet regularly and advise the executive committee in prioritizing implementation tasks and developing future plans. The advisory committee(s) working groups will examine day to day operational requirements and the technology required to meet those requirements, if the requirements can not be satisfied through changes in operational procedures/ protocols or training, recommended technical solutions will be provided to the steering committee. It will ensure that day to day operational requirements are met and that interoperability for ARDIN and the regions that make up ARDIN create a system that will enable first responders to roam seamlessly through out the ten-county region.

Timeframe: June, 2008

Funding Requirement: There is no funding requirement.

Performance Measure(s):

1) The Bay Area SUASI Interoperability Working Group has transitioned to the ARDIN Executive Committee (governing body) operating under ARDIN by-laws and forms a Steering Committee and User Groups with representation from each local region, county and municipality. The governance structure is coordinating the standardization of policies, procedures, protocols and equipment within the ARDIN and with other local, state and federal agencies by June, 2008.



January 30, 2008


2) Regional (EBRCS, WBRCS, WBRCS) Systems have established or transitioned to a complete three tiered governance structure with regional by-laws and provide representation to the ARDIN Executive Committee. Each regional and separate county governance structure is coordinating with ARDIN and the other RCS’s and separate counties within ARDIN and with other local, state and federal agencies in the standardization of policies, procedures, protocols and equipment by June, 2008.

3) Counties within the Bay Area, not part of a regional system, have formed three tiered governance structures for intra-county communications systems and provided representation on the ARDIN Executive Committee by June, 2008.

4) ARDIN is represented on the California State Interoperability Executive Committee (SIEC) by June, 2008.

Person/Agency Responsible:

Chairperson of the SUASI/ARDIN Approval Authority or their designee

2) Agreements

The ARDIN and the respective regional communications systems will take the actions necessary to develop and publish practitioner driven charters and appropriate Joint Powers Agreements (JPA’s) or Memorandums of Understanding (MOU’s) which will commit their respective organizations to the support of current and long term communications interoperability initiatives within the region.

Charter: ARDIN and each region will develop a charter for their respective systems. The charter will specify what is to be accomplished, define the vision, scope, goals and objectives, establish the decision making structure, project management approach and the initial resource requirements.

JPA’s/ MOU’s: ARDIN and each region will leverage existing agreements and modify, develop and adopt appropriate JPA’s/MOU’s which capture the vision, goal and objectives of seamless roaming provided by standards based P25 systems, include a sustainment funding component which supports near and long term funding for management, maintenance and system upgrades, provides for periodic review and provides for practitioner driver requirements determination. Management responsibilities for single project initiatives, such as the digital microwave backbone and multi-band repeaters, will be included within ARDIN or respective regional JPA’s/ MOU’s as appropriate.

Timeframe: July, 2008



1. The current SUASI MOU is modified and approved by the respective organizations to reflect the narrowly defined communications interoperability focus of ARDIN and provides for the establishment of a governance structure solely dedicated to the management and sustainment of ARDIN by July, 2008.

2. The ARDIN has developed a charter which includes the information as described above by July, 2008.

3. Each local region and county not part of a region has developed appropriate JPSs/ MOUs in support of communications operability/ interoperability within their respective areas as outlined above by July, 2008.



January 30, 2008


4. Each local region and separate county has developed a charter as described above by July, 2008.



3) Funding

The ARDIN and regional communications systems will develop annual and long term funding plans which support a long term strategy for acquiring future, maintenance and upgrade funding for their systems. All funding plans within the Bay Area will be coordinated and prioritized with regard to maximizing the vision for operability and interoperability for the entire Bay Area. The Funding Plans will support the consolidation of assets, such as facilities, towers, spectrum, into regional systems in order to maximize cost saving, create efficiencies and increase the operational and interoperable effectiveness of the multiple systems. The funding plans will take into account grant as well as local funding and maximize state and federal resources




1. The ARDIN has developed a comprehensive funding plan for the region, in coordination with the local regions and separate counties, which reflects both grant and non-grant funding and provides for current and future acquisitions as well as the future management and sustainment of the system by July, 2008.

2. Each local regional and county system, in coordination with the ARDIN, have developed comprehensive funding plans for their respective systems which reflect both grant and non-grant funding for current and future acquisitions and the management and sustainment of their respective systems by July, 2008.



4) Strategic Plans

Strategic plans will be updated for ARDIN and developed for each regional communications system with the guidance and approval of the respective governance structure for that/ those system(s). The strategic plans will support the vision of a standards based P-25 system which supports:

1) Seamless roaming for all agencies operating within the Bay Area

2) Combines the coordination of all communications systems assets within the Bay Area to maximize operational effectiveness, efficiencies and potential cost avoidance or savings.

3) Provides the roadmap for accomplishing the vision in a logical, phased approach that is coordinated with all of the agencies within the Bay Area and ARDIN and the respective regional communications systems.

4) Includes a funding strategy which includes near and long term funding requirements



January 30, 2008


5) Provides performance measures that will gage the communications operability and interoperability of local, regional, state and federal agencies working within the Bay Area.

6) Provides for an annual review and update based on lessons learned from real world events, exercises or changes in technology.




1. The ARDIN, in coordination with the local regions and separate counties, has published and distributed a Strategic Plan by March, 2008.

2. The local regions and separate counties, in coordination with ARDIN, have published and distributed a strategic plan by July, 2008.



5) Personnel

ARDIN will take the necessary personnel action to identify and hire a Regional Communications Coordinator for the purpose of managing the regional communications effort.

Timeframe: March 2008

Funding Requirement: To be determined.

Performance Measure: A Communications Coordinator is hired and managing the daily requirements for ARDIN by March, 2008.



5.2.2 Standard Operating Procedures

1) Deploy a NIMS/ICS Communications Unit Leader region wide

NIMS/ICS operational policies and procedures supporting command and control provide a common work process for the variety of agencies, disciplines and jurisdictions involved in an incident to work together and manage the event. An NIMS/ICS Communications Unit Leader must be available 24/7 and deployed and utilized during an incident if effective interoperability is to be achieved.

Timeframe:

October, 2008

Funding Requirement:



January 30, 2008


California OHS PSIC 2008 grant may provide funds to train two Communication Unit Leader positions for each county/operational area.


All Counties/Operational Areas and Regional Communication Systems within ARDIN staff a minimum of two (2) California OHS certified NIMS/ICS Communication Leaders, with one communication unit leader available 24/7 by October, 2008.



2) Implement a NIMS/ICS Communication Unit region wide

NIMS/ICS operational policies and procedures provide a common work process for the variety of agencies, disciplines and jurisdictions involved in an incident to work together and manage the event. The Communications Unit is an integral part of interoperable communication. An ICS Communications Unit must be available 24/7 and deployed and utilized during an incident if effective interoperability is to be achieved.

Timeframe:

October, 2008


Local/region operational budget


All Counties/Operational Areas and Regional Communication Systems within ARDIN staff an NIMS/ICS compliant Communications Unit, available 24/7 by October, 2008.



3) Establish an interagency communication process baseline report for the region.

Standard operating procedures supporting day to day, task force and mutual aid interoperable communication are developed through the description of intra-agency tactical and interagency operational activities and the related interoperable communication functions required to support those activities. This information is obtained through the input of responders who define the processes required to achieve interoperable communication within an agency and between agencies. The information collected from this group is compiled into an inter-agency communication process baseline report (also known as a business process baseline report). The report data provides information on available responder communication technology to manage incidents and the technology capacity and capability needed by responders to complete their assigned missions and objectives.

Timeframe:

October, 2008



January 30, 2008



The SUASI/ARDIN needs to determine if the task can be completed with existing personnel resources or via contractor. If contractor support is desired then funding should be identified.


All Counties/Operational Areas and Regional Communication Systems within ARDIN have completed an interagency communication process baseline report by October, 2008.



4) Implement an interoperability focused, all hazard, all discipline, communication plan region wide.

An operationally focused, all hazard, all discipline, communication interoperability plan will contain, at a minimum, core functions involving communication policies, rules of use, ICS compliant pre-plans, and communication equipment inventory and categorization. Associated with the plan is a common fleetmap for trunked systems and common channel/frequency plan for conventional radio systems for the ADRIN region.

Timeframe:

January, 2009




All Counties/Operational Areas and Regional Communication Systems within ARDIN implement an interoperability focused, all hazard, all discipline, communication plan for their communication system by January, 2009.



5) Develop a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) region wide that ensures continued operation of the regional public safety communications net during an incident response.

A Continuity of Operations Plan provides a capability outlined by National Preparedness Guidelines that ensures continued operation of a regional public safety communications net during an incident response. A COOP should address people, processes, systems and infrastructure elements that are needed to continue to perform critical functions during a disaster or major incident response.

Timeframe:

October, 2009





January 30, 2008



All Counties/Operational Areas and Regional Communication Systems within ARDIN have implemented a COOP for their public safety communications net by October, 2009.



6) Implement a regional incident resource management system to provide emergency responders the ability to locate, track and request needed resources.

A resource identification and management system provides emergency responders the ability to locate, track, and request needed resources. A resource management system is a requirement of FEMA’s National Response Framework.

Timeframe:

January, 2010




All Counties/Operational Areas and Regional Communication Systems within ARDIN have implemented and/or participate in a regional NIMS/ICS incident resource management system by January, 2010.



7) Implement multi-agency coordination centers to facilitate the regional reporting of activities, coordination of operational activities and the development of a common operating picture, during an incident.

A Multi-Agency Coordination System (MACS), a requirement of FEMA’s National Response Framework, requires coordination of existing mutual aid and emergency management plans related to multi-agency coordination centers at the local, regional, state and Federal level. The MACS should facilitate the reporting of activities, coordination of operational activities and the development of a common operating picture, during an incident.

Timeframe:

April, 2010






January 30, 2008


All Counties/Operational Areas and Regional Communication Systems within ARDIN have implemented and participate in region wide NIMS/ICS multi-agency coordination centers by April, 2010.



5.2.3 Technology

In general, the individual initiatives should be completed in this order:

1. Tri-MAC

2. BayLoop Digital Microwave Network

3. E-Comm

4. East Bay RCS

5. Silicon Valley RCS

6. West Bay RCS

7. NorthLink (Solano County)

8. WestLink (DOJ “25 Cities”)

9. SouthLink (BayMACS)

The development activities that follow in this section are listed in preferred order of completion. There may be instances where it makes sense to complete a development activity ahead of its prioritized order, due to reasons of available funding, project delays, or other reasons beyond a project initiative’s control.

1) Complete the Bay Area Digital Microwave Network (BayLoop)

This network, along with the already completed Tri-MAC and the soon to be completed E-comm network, form a robust backbone that allows the transfer of voice and/or data traffic across the Bay Area. This backbone becomes the “pipe” that carries the ISSI traffic between the Regional Communication Systems as well as connecting individual PSAPs across county lines.

A Project Manager to coordinate and lead the implementation effort for the region shall be designated before all other activities commence. This person shall have authority to act on behalf of the region with selected vendors and coordinate site activities with the individual site owners.

Timeframe:

Completion of the system should be accomplished by March, 2009.


Funding to complete the network has been allocated through various SUASI grant funding allocations.




January 30, 2008


1. Engage a design consultant to develop system design and provide implementation guidelines for the Digital Microwave Network by January, 2008.

2. Complete Digital Microwave Network system design by June, 2008.

3. Complete procurement(s) and contract with system vendor(s) to begin system implementation by August 2008.

4. A successfully executed vendor Acceptance Test Plan (ATP) for the network by March, 2009.


Chairperson of the SUASI/ARDIN Approval Authority or their designee.

2) Complete the E-comm Microwave Network

Similar to the BayLoop network, the E-comm backbone becomes the “pipe” that carries the interoperability traffic between the individual PSAPs in Santa Clara County as well as traffic between sites in the SVRCS network.

This network already has a dedicated project manager and is scheduled to be completed in 2008. Work should continue on this project until completion.

Timeframe:

Completion of the system should be accomplished by October, 2008.


Funding to complete the network has been allocated through various SUASI grant funding allocations.


1. A successfully completed vendor Acceptance Test Plan (ATP) for the network by October, 2008.


Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Project (SVRIP).

3) Link all regional microwave networks together to form a larger all-encompassing network.

A DACS can cross-connect any T1 in the system with any other T1 also in the system. A DACS can also connect any DS-0 channel or group of channels on a T1 line to any DS-0 time slots of any other line. By using a DACS the region gains the flexibility of routing specific traffic on the various microwave networks to designated end-points as defined by the channel plan.



January 30, 2008


Carol Drive is a common tie point between the completed Tri-MAC network, the soon to be completed E-comm, and the Digital Microwave Network and can serve as the hub. All major hubs (e.g. Twin Peaks, Redwood City HOJ, Carol Drive, Mt. Tamalpais, etc.) on the BayLoop ring have a Fujistu Multiplexer (MUX) incorporated as part of the design to connect and link the various circuits between all networks that BayLoop traverses. The exception to this is the Dublin EOC site which has a Cisco MUX. These multiplexers can serve as a DACS for linking the various circuits in the BayLoop network.

Linking for the other major microwave networks in the Bay Area should be accomplished in a similar manner as other regional systems come online as part of their initial deployment.

Timeframe:

Deployment can commence once the Carol Drive endpoint equipment for all three microwave networks (Tri-MAC, E-Comm, BayLoop) is installed and should be completed by January, 2009.


Initial estimates for completing this task based on similar projects is $50K.


1. A successfully completed channel/bandwidth plan vetted by all appropriate SUASI/ARDIN representatives by September, 2008.

2. Procure and contract with system vendor(s) to begin system implementation by October, 2008.

3. A successfully completed vendor Acceptance Test Plan (ATP) by June, 2009.

Person/Agency Responsible: Chairperson of the SUASI/ARDIN Approval Authority or their designee.

4) The SUASI/ARDIN shall establish a Technical Standards Workgroup to facilitate future expansion and coordinate ARDIN technology needs on a regional basis.

Technical standards within ARDIN are a key requirement to ensure compatibility and maintain interoperability capabilities. One key benefit of having common technical standards is that the Bay Area gains the benefit of being able to develop common interoperability protocols through the use of common equipment.

This group should function under a designated governance authority and have sufficient representation from all agencies within the Bay Area region.

Some of the tasks that the Spectrum Management Workgroup should consider:

a) Developing minimum technical standards for subscriber equipment.

Specifications should include standards for:

• P25 compliance.

• Minimum number of channels/talkgroups

• Encryption



January 30, 2008


• Frequency Band: VHF, 7/800 MHz. tri-band (VHF,700, 800 MHz)

• RF specifications: RF power, Receiver Sensitivity, Frequency Stability, etc.

• Trunking System capabilities: private call, telephone interconnect, etc.

• Dispatch capabilities

• Fallback procedures and testing

b) Developing common radio templates to facilitate interoperability planning.

The use of common a template (e.g. common “C” zone or bank) ensures that all participants in a multi-agency incident can operate per the Incident Commander’s directives. Channel names should follow NPSTC recommendations for common interoperability channels.

c) Developing inter-system roaming methods and protocols for ARDIN P25 subsystems.

The ISSI standard is not finalized at this time and some ARDIN subsystems may come online prior to ISSI interface equipment becoming available. By developing roaming methods or protocols interoperability capabilities can be maintained until ISSI is fully available.

d) Developing subscriber access and control procedures for BayLink subsystems

Develop the methods and standards for automatic access. Keeping the system in an always-on state to minimize dispatcher intervention and speed response time is valuable, but steps should be taken to limit the potential for interference of neighboring regions by utilizing some method for system access, such as MDC-1200, GE STAR signaling, or DTMF.

e) Developing migration planning with regards to technology evolution.

A good example of migration planning would be incorporating P25 Phase II technology into ARDIN subsystem. Other examples could include migration from wideband 25 kHz systems to narrowband 12.5 kHz systems.

Timeframe:

Formation of the workgroup by May, 2008. Completion of initial technology standards by May, 2009. Follow-on activities, such as the further refining of standards, are ongoing.


The SUASI/ARDIN needs to determine if specific tasks the workgroup desires can be completed with existing personnel resources or via contractor. If contractor support is desired then funding should be identified to complete those tasks.


1. Successfully defining the mission and membership of the Workgroup by May, 2008.

2. Defining initial technology standards by May, 2009





January 30, 2008


5) The SUASI/ARDIN shall establish a Spectrum Management Workgroup to facilitate future expansion and coordinate ARDIN spectrum needs on a regional basis.

Spectrum is a critical need for ARDIN. A spectrum management group would not only ensure the needed VHF and 700 MHz channels are available and properly engineered for use within ARDIN but also for agencies that will continue to remain on their legacy conventional systems so that they may expand those systems.

This group should function under a designated governance authority and have sufficient representation from all agencies within the Bay Area region.

Some of the tasks that the Spectrum Management Workgroup should consider:

a) Completing the planning effort for conducting a Spectrum Inventory

The Spectrum Management Workgroup shall develop a plan to maintain an inventory of spectrum assets per licensee in the region and identify which assets are in use and for what purpose. In the case of regional systems, the groups should evaluate if the system/frequency in question needs to be on a standalone system and can its function be moved onto the regional system so that the frequency/channel can be used elsewhere with greater efficiency and benefit.

b) Completing the planning effort for conducting a VHF/UHF Repacking

The spectrum Management Workgroup shall develop a plan to conduct a “repacking” within the region. This repacking will consist of shuffling the various VHF and UHF channels in use around the region to create the most efficient use of the spectrum. By using an optimal placement, certain channels can be reused resulting in greater capacity throughout the region.

c) Identifying new spectrum resources as a result of regulatory actions

This activity also extends to migrations that occur because of mandatory narrowbanding for those licensees whose systems operate in the 150-512 MHz range. As these systems are narrowbanded to 12.5 kHz, interstitial frequencies will become available for use. Identifying these channels now for later licensing and deployment could aid greatly in expanding capacity and/coverage of systems remaining in the VHF and UHF range.

In addition to VHF/UHF, additional frequencies may become available in the 854-860 MHz range after Rebanding. At this time, Public Safety will have the ability to license this spectrum on a “first come, first served” basis. The Spectrum Management Workgroup should work to identify this affected spectrum and submit the appropriate licensing forms to gain access to this valuable spectrum.

A plan shall be developed to identify these spectrum resources.

Timeframe:

Formation of the workgroup should be completed by May, 2008. Completion of initial planning (e.g. a, b, and c above) should be completed by September, 2008. Follow-on activities (i.e. actually implementing the plan) are contingent on plan details.




January 30, 2008


The SUASI/ARDIN needs to determine if specific tasks the workgroup desires can be completed with existing personnel resources or via contractor. If contractor support is desired then funding should be identified to complete those tasks.


1. Successfully defining the mission and membership of the Workgroup by May, 2008.

2. Completing a Spectrum Inventory Plan by September, 2008

3. Completing a VHF/UHF Repacking Plan by September, 2008

4. Completing a Regulatory Spectrum Plan by September, 2008



6) The SUASI/ARDIN shall establish a common ID and talkgroup fleetmap to facilitate future expansion.

In order for ARDIN to be successful, common trunked system planning elements need to be established for the entire region. Chief among these is a common fleetmap structure. The fleetmap shall incorporate all agencies and jurisdictions in all ten Bay Area Counties whether they are currently active participants in an RCS project or not. By incorporating all agencies in the fleetmap, ARDIN can facilitate interoperability by developing interoperability talkgroups to serve all agencies and plan for growth.

Timeframe:

Completion of a regionwide fleetmap by September, 2008.




1. A successfully completed fleetmap vetted by appropriate SUASI/ARDIN representatives by September, 2008.



7) Operability Plan

Network operability is a crucial factor in interoperability planning and successful tactical and intra-agency and inter-agency communication. If a system does not provide the required coverage, capacity, or capability needed for first responders to perform their day to day, tactical missions, their ability to interoperate locally and at the inter-agency level is compromised.



January 30, 2008


As plans are developed, and as systems and subsystems are designed within the region, a core component of each activity is an assessment of local operability. This assessment must identify known geographic locations or physical structures that first responders cannot communicate into or out from when conducting tactical communications. Solutions may include additional tower site installation, in building antenna installation or standard operating procedures that provide direction to first responders on how to establish procedures to minimize the loss of tactical communication. Appropriate training and exercises should then incorporate these solutions in preparing first responders.

An operability plan should be implemented and updated and reviewed annually or updated from After Action Reports preceding major incidents. These updates should identify known “dead spots” and the interim solutions for first responder communications in those locations, i.e., creation or modification of tactical SOPs. Within the operability plan, future solutions to provide operable levels of communication should be identified with the associated funding requirements and funding source identified and an anticipated date of solution implementation. This annual operability plan and applicable updates should be distributed routinely to ICS Communication Unit Leaders, Communication Coordinators and emergency management offices within the affected operational area.

Funding requirements and shortfalls should be further identified during the annual review of the Strategic Plan. These emerging operational requirements should be incorporated into the Strategic Plan and reviewed along with existing funding requirements and prioritized or re-prioritized. Upon the approval of the governing body, the revised funding plan is published as part of the annual review process.

Timeframe: December, 2009




Completed Operations and Maintenance plan with applicable funding streams identified and in place by December, 2009

Strategic Plan/ funding plan updated by December, 2009.


Each Regional System Chairperson or delegate or subsystem primary agency will be responsible for their individual Operability Plan.

8) Operations and Maintenance Plan



January 30, 2008


Each Regional Communication System or subsystem will require a funded operational and maintenance funding plan for system infrastructure and system subscriber units, mobile, portable and control stations. This plan becomes even more critical as new equipment warranties begin to expire and new equipment begins to age. Historical data indicates that, as the systems and equipment age, the owners should anticipate the cost to support those systems and equipment to increase. Operations and Maintenance (O&M) costs will be incurred for routine infrastructure maintenance and trunked system controllers when the controller software is updated or modified. Trunked subscriber unit O&M involves manufacture recommended routine “tuning” of each individual unit, and software upgrades for each subscriber unit caused by controller software changes or unit function enhancements.

Each microwave system and multi-band repeater system will need individual O&M plans or plans integrated into overall system O&M plans.

Each O&M plan will require a funding allocation and identified funding stream for each regional or local system. The plan should be updated annually.

Funding Source Options

• System manufacture purchase agreement to include future controller and subscriber upgrades and maintenance

• System fee assessments (see Appendix C – Funding MOU Template)

• 911 fees allocation

• Bond or local/regional user fee assessment

Timeframe:

December 2008


Initial estimates for annual infrastructure and subscriber O&M would be a minimum of 40-50% or more of the systems purchase price extended over the entire lifecycle of the system/equipment.


Completed Operations and Maintenance funding plan with applicable funding streams identified and in place by December, 2008.


Each Regional System Chairperson or delegate or subsystem primary agency will be responsible for their regional O&M plan.

9) Complete the East Bay Regional Communications System (EBRCS)

The EBRCS project is underway with the installation of the system’s master site already completed and with four RF sites already configured and warehoused awaiting installation. The lack of interoperability capabilities above a technology level 2 in some areas of Contra Costa County and northern Alameda County, as well as operability issues for both counties are other factors for priority development of this system.



January 30, 2008


Timeframe:

As based on the Motorola proposal the EBRCS is scheduled for completion in 2011, the system should be completed per the schedule


$32M has been identified from SUASI grant funding, earmark grants, PSIC grants, and other funding sources. There is a $35M shortfall that needs to be funded in order to complete the system as proposed by Motorola.


1. Engage a design consultant to develop system design and provide procurement/implementation support for the EBRCS by March, 2008.

2. Complete and finalize entire system design by September, 2009.

3. Procure and contract with system vendor(s) to begin phased system implementation by March 2010.

4. A successfully completed Acceptance Test Plan for the entire system completed by December, 2011.


The EBRCS Project Representative.

10) Complete the Silicon Valley Regional Communications System (SVRCS)

Since the county has interoperability capabilities at a technology level 3 through the use of BayMACS in many areas of Santa Clara County, its completion priority is a step below the EBRCS.

Timeframe:

The SVRCS shall be completed by September, 2011. This timeframe give the SVRCS a little over three years to deploy once 700 MHz channels are available. This timeframe also gives individual VHF/UHF agencies the ability to narrowband their systems in the event that the system cannot be completed on time.


The system design is in the very beginning stages of development at this time. Initial estimates for infrastructure based on similar systems from range from $50M to $70M.


1. Engage a design consultant to develop system design for the SVRCS by February, 2008.

2. Complete and finalize entire system design by June, 2008.

3. Procure and contract with system vendor(s) to begin phased system implementation by December 2009.

4. A successfully completed Acceptance Test Plan for the entire system completed by December, 2011.



January 30, 2008



The SVRCS Project Representative.

11) Complete the West Bay Regional Communications System (WBRCS)

The individual systems currently making up the WBRCS (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo County) each currently operate at a technology level 4 within their respective counties.

Timeframe:

The WBRCS shall be completed by September, 2012. This timeframe give the WBRCS a little over three years to deploy once 700 MHz channels are available.


The system design is in the very beginning stages of development at this time. Initial estimates for infrastructure based on similar systems range from $70M to $90M.


1. Engage a consultant to develop system design and county-level strategic planning support for the individual systems comprising the WBRCS by February, 2008.

2. Complete county-level strategic planning by June, 2008.

3. Procure and contract with system vendor(s) to begin phased system implementation by December 2009.

4. A successfully completed Acceptance Test Plan for the entire system completed by September, 2012.


The WBRCS Project Representative.

12) Begin planning for ARDIN expansion into Napa, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma Counties

Expanding ARDIN into the northern Bay Area counties and Santa Cruz further enhances interoperability capabilities for the region.

Timeframe:

The development of the plan for expansion will dictate the timeframe for the expansion of ARDIN into the Northern Counties and Santa Cruz. System designs should be completed by December, 2010.


Engaging a design consultant to complete planning and designs for the expansion. Estimate $400K.


1. Engage a consultant to develop system design and county-level strategic planning support for the individual systems by February, 2010.



January 30, 2008


2. Complete design and county-level strategic planning by November, 2010.

3. Update Strategic Plan with county-level planning by December, 2010.



13) Aggregate the various multiband repeater systems into one cohesive system (BayLink). Expand BayLink to allow State, Federal, and agencies from outside the Bay Area to interoperate with local agencies across the Bay Area.

By combining the multi-band repeater systems to form one cohesive system, the Bay Area gains a conventional overlay system to allow users from differing frequency bands to communicate. This system would be a common platform to allow users from outside of the region or from agencies not affiliated with ARDIN to interoperate with ARDIN units and vice versa.

The systems should be expanded to meet the following coverage requirements:

1. DOJ “25 Cities” should service Marin/SF/San Mateo and Western Alameda Counties and becomes “WestLink”. The primary agency for operations, administration, maintenance, and provisioning (OAM&P) is San Francisco.

2. SECA should service Solano/Napa/Sonoma/Contra Costa and Eastern Alameda Counties and becomes “NorthLink”. The primary agency for OAM&P is SECA (Solano County).

3. BayMACS should service Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties and becomes “SouthLink”. The primary agency for OAM&P is SVRIP.

BayMACS (SouthLink) should be integrated with the DOJ “25 Cities” (WestLink) SmartLink Controller to take advantage of ISSI functionality at a later date.

To accommodate the traffic load associated with emergency interoperability events, the subsystem primary agencies should increase the capacity of the BayLink systems by adding national interoperability channels to the systems (ICALL/8CAL90, UTAC1/4TAC28, etc,). This serves two purposes; the first is to increase the system to multiple channels. Secondly, it would provide hailing channels that would allow outside agencies to come into the area and be assigned to staging areas without having to reprogram their subscriber units.

Timeframe:

The expansions for BayLink subsystems shall commence after their associated RCS system is completed. Expansions shall be completed by December, 2013


Initial estimates for infrastructure, based on similar systems, range from $2M to $5M.


Completed vendor ATP for each BayLink subsystem by December, 2013.


Each subsystem primary agency will be responsible for the buildout of its subsystem.



January 30, 2008


14) All Regional Communications Systems shall implement P25 ISSI functionality

RCS Agencies and the City of Oakland shall work with each regional system’s selected vendor to gain commitment on their P25 ISSI roadmap and implement P25 ISSI functionality in the systems they deploy and/or upgrade. By implementing ISSI functionality, the regional systems can link with each other and other P25 compatible networks as they come online to form a “system of systems”.

One system, EBRCS, has a master site controller already installed. Based on the vendor proposal, this system is not currently slated to be ISSI compliant. However all future P25 systems should have, as part of their contract with their chosen vendor, contract language which stipulates that the system shall be upgraded to ISSI compliance once the standard is published as part of the system implementation.

Timeframe:

This objective is contingent on the completion of the P25 ISSI standard and subsequent adoption by the various P25 infrastructure manufacturers. The standard for basic trunking ISSI procedures and functionality is scheduled to be adopted by the ISSI Task Group by January 2008 with later ratification by the TIA TR8.19 committee7. However, the actual ratification date by the TIA TR8.19 committee is still to be determined.

Manufacturers should have conforming interfaces available 12 to 18 months after the standard is published. System operators shall implement ISSI as soon as practical. Procurement contracts with RCS vendors should include language requiring ISSI upgrades as they become available.


Since the standard has not been completed, manufacturers have not published pricing on ISSI upgrades. As the standard becomes ratified, the plan should be revisited with each RCS vendor to gather budgetary pricing on ISSI upgrades.


1. Procure and contract with the respective system vendor(s) to begin ISSI implementation concurrent with overall system implementation.

2. A successfully completed Acceptance Test Plan for ISSI functionality for each P25 trunking network (EBRCS, SVRCS, WBRCS, and City of Oakland) completed concurrent with overall system acceptance testing.


Each P25 capable system or subsystem representative is responsible for their individual system (e.g. EBRCS, SVRCS, Marin County, San Francisco, San Mateo County, and Oakland)

15) BayLink Subsystems shall implement P25 ISSI functionality

7 Updated since Interoperability Assessment, Project 25 Document Suite Reference (December 2007) - http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/resources/p25/P25DocSelection.pdf



January 30, 2008


BayLink Agencies shall work with each subsystem’s selected vendor to gain commitment on their P25 ISSI roadmap and implement P25 ISSI functionality in the systems they deploy and/or upgrade. By implementing ISSI functionality, the BayLink subsystems can link with compatible ISSI P25 networks as they come online to form a “system of systems”.

Timeframe:

This objective is contingent on the completion of the P25 ISSI standard and subsequent adoption by the various P25 infrastructure manufacturers. The standard for basic conventional ISSI procedures and functionality is scheduled to be adopted by the ISSI Task Group by April 2008 with later ratification by the TIA TR8.19 committee8. However, the actual ratification date by the TIA TR8.19 committee is still to be determined.

Manufacturers should have conforming interfaces available 12 to 18 months after the standard is published. System operators shall implement ISSI as soon as practical.


Since the standard has not been completed, manufacturers have not published pricing on ISSI upgrades. As the standard becomes ratified, the plan should be revisited with each RCS vendor to gather budgetary pricing on ISSI upgrades. Procurement contracts with BayLink vendors should include language requiring ISSI upgrades as they become available.


3. Procure and contract with the respective system vendor(s) to begin ISSI implementation concurrent with overall system implementation.

4. A successfully completed Acceptance Test Plan for ISSI functionality for each P25 trunking network (EBRCS, SVRCS, WBRCS, and City of Oakland) completed concurrent with overall system acceptance testing.


Each P25 capable system or subsystem representative is responsible for their individual system (e.g. EBRCS, SVRCS, Marin County, San Francisco, San Mateo County, and Oakland)

5.2.4 Funding

Funding for ARDIN, the Regional Communications Systems (RCS) and counties will be provided from various sources to include federal and state grants, general funds, bond issues, fees and other means. ARDIN will actively pursue state and federal grant funding for the region in order to offset the initial high acquisition cost of communications and equipment; however, each RCS and county will bear the responsibility for any unfunded additional cost of system acquisition, purchase of subscriber equipment, and future system management/maintenance. Memorandums of Understanding will be established within ARDIN and the respective RCSs which identify and commit the respective agencies to funding support of the respective systems. The table below (Table 2 - ARDIN Acquisition Funding), provides the current funding profile for the RCSs and counties which will comprise ARDIN. The projected cost of the system(s),

8 Updated since Interoperability Assessment, Project 25 Document Suite Reference (December 2007) - http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/resources/p25/P25DocSelection.pdf



January 30, 2008


based on the best available information, as of the date of this plan, is provided along with grant and local funding to date and the unfunded balance.

Table 2 - ARDIN Acquisition Funding

ARDIN Acquisition Funding

Organization Projected Cost9 (Infrastructure

only)

Grant Funding to Date

Local Funding Identified

Amount Unfunded

BayLoop $10,000,000 $7,200,000 $- $2,800,000

BayLink $5,000,000 $- $- $5,000,000

EBRCS $67,826,989 $26,129,048 $1,638,682 $40,059,259

Napa County $20,000,000 $- $- $20,000,000

Santa Cruz County

$24,000,000 $- $- $24,000,000

Solano County

$43,000,000 $- $- $43,000,000

Sonoma County

$45,000,000 $- $- $45,000,000

SVRCS $60,000,000 $11,224,200 $1,244,840 $47,530,960

WBRCS $80,000,000 $11,767,612 $5,341,522 $62,890,866

Total $354,826,989 $56,320,860 $8,225,044 $290,281,085

The initial cost of acquisition for a communications system only represents a portion of the cost of a system over its entire life cycle. Initial operating costs are generally lower because various warranties keep the cost of maintenance down for a period and extended warranties are sometimes negotiated which may reduce initial operating costs for a longer period of time. However, the cost to maintain a modern communications system over time remains significant. In order to provide a planning factor for future budgeting and funding, estimated maintenance funding requirements for the respective systems are listed below. The costs identified below reflect support of currently funded systems and does not reflect support for infrastructure not yet funded (see Table 3 - ARDIN Maintenance Funding Requirements).

9 Costs represent best estimates available based on systems from agencies of similar size and scope at time of writing.



January 30, 2008


The digital trunked systems in production today are generally software based and often require periodic software upgrades. Depending on the type system and the extent of the upgrade, the cost may vary significantly; therefore, a small percentage has been included for each fiscal year in the maintenance funding projections provided below. The actual cost of these upgrades may be significantly more than the below projections and system managers should set aside a reserve or have alternative funding solutions to cover these unanticipated costs.

Table 3 - ARDIN Maintenance Funding Requirements

ARDIN Maintenance Funding Requirements

Organization FY ‘08 FY ‘09 FY ‘10 FY ‘11 FY ‘12

BayLink $0 TBD TBD TBD TBD

BayLoop $0 $0 $52,000 $105,000 $105,000

EBRCS $0 $0 $121,000 $245,000 $405,000

SVRCS $0 $0 $81,000 $164,000 $165,000

WBRCS $0 $0 $81,000 $164,000 $165,000

Napa County $0 $0 TBD TBD TBD

Santa Cruz County $0 $0 TBD TBD TBD

Solano County $0 $0 TBD TBD TBD

Sonoma County $0 $0 TBD TBD TBD

Total $0 $0 $350,000 $698,000 $869,000

5.2.5 Phased Implementation Schedule

5.2.5.1 Phase I - 2008

ARDIN Project – Year 1 (Short-term) Project Description Projected Cost Funding Source Notes

Governance Leadership/Decision-making Structures

N/A N/A

Governance Agreements N/A N/A Governance Funding Plans N/A N/A Governance Strategic Plans N/A N/A SOPs NIMS/ICS Comm Unit

Leader Training TBD Cal OHS PSIC 2008

grant Grant to provide funding per



January 30, 2008


ARDIN Project – Year 1 (Short-term) Project Description Projected Cost Funding Source Notes

OA to train two personnel

SOPs NIMS/ICS Comm Unit Staffing

TBD Local/Regional Operating Budgets (ongoing)

SOPs Develop Interagency Communications Baseline Report

TBD TBD

SOPs Develop Interoperability Comm Plan

TBD TBD

BayLoop Complete BayLoop $210,000 (initial design est.)

2006 SUASI Actual hardware and install contingent on final design

E-Comm Complete E-Comm $3,200,000 2005 SUASI BayLoop Link microwave

networks to BayLoop $50,000 (est.) TBD

Spectrum Spectrum Planning TBD TBD Follow-on activities occur after planning phase

Fleetmapping Region-wide Fleetmap $350,000 (est.) TBD EBRCS Complete design and

implement core infrastructure

$4,500,000 (est.) 2007 SUASI 2006 SHSGP

SVRCS Complete design and implement core infrastructure

$5,000,000 (est.) 2006 SUASI 2007 SUASI

WBRCS Complete design and implement core infrastructure

$5,300,000 (est.) 2007 SUASI



January 30, 2008


5.2.5.2 Phase II – 2009

ARDIN Project – Year 2 (Mid-term) Project Description Projected Cost Funding Source Notes

SOPs Develop COOP Plan TBD TBD

SOPs Implement Regional Incident Resource Management System

TBD TBD

SOPs Implement Multi-Agency Coordination Centers

TBD TBD

BayLoop Complete BayLoop TBD 2006 SUASI Actual hardware and install contingent on final design

Spectrum Complete Spectrum Inventory

$200,000 (est.) TBD

Spectrum VHF/UHF Repacking $350,000 (est.) TBD

EBRCS Continue to implement core infrastructure

$17,100,000 (est.)

2007 Earmark 2007 COPS 2007 PSIC 2007 SHSGP TBD

SVRCS Continue to implement core infrastructure

$7,500,000 (est.) 2007 PSIC

WBRCS Continue to implement core infrastructure

$11,800,000 (est.)

2007 SUASI

2007 PSIC

Local 911 Fee Funds



January 30, 2008


5.2.5.3 Phase III - 2010


SOPs Implement Regional Incident Resource Management System

TBD TBD

SOPs Implement Multi-Agency Coordination Centers

TBD TBD


$17,000,000 (est.)

TBD


$25,000,000 (est.)

TBD


$25,000,000 (est.)

TBD

BayLink Begin planning for ISSI connectivity to ARDIN subsystems

$150,000 (est.) TBD

ARDIN Expansion Begin planning for ARDIN expansion into Napa, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma Counties

$400,000 (est.) TBD



January 30, 2008


5.2.5.4 Phase IV - 2011



$13,000,000 (est.)

TBD


$23,000,000 (est.)

TBD


$25,000,000 (est.)

TBD

BayLink Begin planning for subsystem coverage and capacity expansion

$150,000 (est.) TBD

BayLink Implement ISSI connectivity to ARDIN subsystems

TBD TBD

5.2.5.5 Phase V - 2012



$18,200,000 (est.)

TBD

BayLink Expand BayLink Subsystems

$3M (est.) TBD



January 30, 2008


5.2.5.6 Summary Schedule

Shown below is the summary schedule identifying major ARDIN initiatives:

Complete BayLoop

Complete E-Comm

Link Microwave systems regionwide

Establish Technical Stds Working Group

Establish Spectrum Management Working Group

Develop Regionwide Fleetmap

Complete EBRCS

Complete SVRCS

Complete WBRCS

ARDIN expansion planning (Napa, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma)

Expand the Multiband Repeater Systems

Implement Trunked P25 ISSI

Implement Conventional P25 ISSI

Governance Agreements/Plans

Comm Unit Leaders

Communications Baseline Report

Interoperability Communication Plan

COOP Plan

Regional Resource Management System

Multi-Agency Coord. Ctrs.

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Figure 6 - Summary Schedule



January 30, 2008


6. Long Term Planning

Planning beyond the five-year cycle of this strategic plan includes developing systems in the four Bay Area Counties of Napa, Solano, Sonoma, and Santa Cruz as well as linkage to other regions in Northern California.

Sonoma County will transition to 700 MHz for its voice communications as part of Sonoma County’s strategic plan. Santa Cruz and Solano Counties have recently commissioned studies to aid in understanding the issues of migrating to a next-generation network. Napa is in the process of completing a simulcast upgrade to its systems and is formulating plans for its transition to next generation technology.

Additional planning is necessary to bring clarity to the strategic direction that these counties will take. However, it is envisioned that Napa and Santa Cruz Counties will remain in the VHF band but move towards a P25 trunked infrastructure and that Sonoma and Solano Counties will move to hybrid VHF/700 MHz P25 trunked infrastructures. To maintain economies of scale and provide greater integration of these networks, these counties could share master site infrastructure with existing RCS systems.

Linkage to Sacramento County and their planned P25 system via the I-80 corridor are in the developing stages through the use of a Bay-Capital region microwave network and the development of a conventional overlay system similar to BayLink traversing through Yolo County. Monterey County is also in the planning stages of deploying a VHF P25 system and linkage to the SVRCS via ISSI begins to form a P25 zone that stretches from Silicon Valley to Monterey County that could also include San Benito and Santa Cruz Counties.

As these programs develop and mature, their action plans should be incorporated into this Strategic Plan.

7. Review Cycle

The Interoperability Lifecycle is a continuous process of planning, deployment, and review to enhance capabilities and response. This Strategic Plan is a living document and is a key component of the lifecycle. It should be revisited and updated on a yearly basis, at a minimum. Updating could occur on a more frequent basis if conditions warrant, such as changes in: regulatory processes, technology evolution, funding, or operational mission. Each respective governance board is responsible for local reviews, regional review and update should occur at the ARDIN governance level.

Bay Area SUASI Interoperability Assessment and Gap Analysis


January 30, 2008

Appendices

Bay Area SUASI SUASI Strategic Plan draft (1-30-

A-1

08)_1.doc



January 30, 2008

Appendices

Appendix A – Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions

APCO - Association of Public Safety Communications Officials International, Inc.

ARDIN – Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network

BER - Bit Error Rate

Bps - Bits per Second

CAI - Common Air Interface

DAQ – Delivered Audio Quality

dB - Decibel

dBm - Decibel (referenced to milliwatts)

DS1 - Digital Signal 1. Used in telephone and other voice/data networks to carry traffic. (24 voice channels; 1.544 MBPS)

DS3 - Digital Signal 3 (672 voice channels; 28 DS1; 44.736 MBPS)

EIA - Electronics Industry Association

EIR – Environmental Impact Report

EMS - Emergency Medial Service

EOC - Emergency Operations Center

ERP - Effective Radiated Power

FCC - Federal Communications Commission

FDMA - Frequency Division Multiple Access

GHz - Giga-Hertz

k - Kilo / Thousand

kbps - Kilobits Per Second

KDT - Keyboard Display Terminal

kHz - Kilohertz


A-2

08)_1.doc



January 30, 2008

LMR – Land Mobile Radio

MBPS - Mega-bits per Second

MHz - Megahertz

NPSPAC - National Public Safety Planning Advisory Committee

OC3 - Optical Carrier 3 - 155.52 MBPS Link

PSAP – Public Safety Answering Point

RF - Radio Frequency

RFP - Request for Proposals

SOP – Standard Operating Procedure

SOW – Scope/Statement of Work

SUASI – Super Urban Area Security Initiative

TIA - Telecommunications Industry Association

UASI – Urban Area Security Initiative

UHF – Ultra High Frequency (typically considered 450-512 MHz in public safety radio applications)

VHF – Very High Frequency (typically considered 150-174 MHz in public safety radio applications)


A-3

08)_1.doc



January 30, 2008

Appendix B – Spectrum Roadmap

1. Introduction

There are many bands affected by recent changes or planned changes within the next 5 years that are important. Due to the nature of these changes (narrowbanding below 512 MHz, 800 Rebanding, 700 MHz rules changes in the upcoming 2008 auction), a separate section is devoted to future spectrum changes.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates the spectrum for non-federal users while the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) regulate specific frequencies for federal agency users. The spectrum for state and local is divided up as demonstrated in the following chart:10

Figure 7

The aggregate amount of state and local public safety spectrum allocated today within these sub-bands is approximately 96 MHz. Final allocation is subject to change pending final resolution of 800 MHz re-banding along with the recent 700 MHz rule changes. It is important to understand that within this

Bay Area SUASI SUASI Strategic Plan draft (1-30-08)_1.doc B-1

10 http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/212975.pdf



January 30, 2008


document, only spectrum considered “useable” by the SUASI is considered. The following bands are not considered useable within the context of this document:

1. 220 MHz to 222 MHz is considered unusable due to the lack of equipment offered by industry. Additionally, the modulation type is neither a common analog or digital format used in public safety. If deployed, this would cause difficult interoperability issues with most agencies that need interoperability within the SUASI as well as those agencies outside of the SUASI that could, in the event of a larger scale event, need to interoperate within the SUASI.

2. 929 MHz to 930 MHz due to the restrictions imposed by the FCC this spectrum block is available for one-way paging operations in accordance with §90.494.11

3. 1427 MHz to 1432 MHz is also considered unusable due to the lack of protection and secondary use basis only. Again very limited equipment and specific use of this section of spectrum considerably lowers its value when considering the overall SUASI, therefore it is not included in this analysis. This frequency band is available to stations in this service subject to the provisions of §90.25912

4. 2450 MHz to 2500 MHz is not reasonable for use in planning of interoperability on a unit-to-unit basis or for any system development. Part 90.2, note 73 of the FCC rules state: “Available only on a shared basis with stations in other services, and subject to no protection from interference due to the operation of industrial, scientific, or medical (ISM) devices. In the band 2483.5-2500 MHz, no applications for new stations or modifications to existing stations to increase the number of transmitters will be accepted. Existing licensees as of July 25, 1985, and licensees whose initial applications were filed on or before July 25, 1985, are grandfathered and their operations are on a co-primary basis with the mobile-satellite and radiodetermination-satellite, services, and in the segment 2495-2500 MHz, their operations are also on a co-primary basis with Part 27 fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile service operations.13”

The bands considered useful for the SUASI and included in this analysis are as follows:

Common Name Frequency Range Bandwidth Available

VHF Low Band 30 MHz to 50 MHz 6.80 MHz

VHF High Band 150 MHz to 174 MHz 7.25 MHz

UHF 450 MHz to 512 MHz 15.775 MHz

700 MHz 763 MHz → 10 MHz

11 Part 90 FCC Rules and Regulations, 90.20 Note (71)

12 Part 90 of the FCC Rules and Regulations §90.259 Assignment and use of frequencies in the bands 216-220 MHz and 1427-1432 MHz

13 Part 90 FCC Rules and Regulations, 90.2 Note (73)



January 30, 2008


800 MHz 806 MHz → 9.5 MHz

4.9 GHz 4940 MHz to 4990 MHz 50 MHz

Table 4

2. 30-50 MHz (Low Band)

VHF Low Band is highly fragmented. VHF Low Band spectrum is characterized as an unstructured band. Channel allocations are assigned throughout the band without designated base station transmit or base station receive sub-bands as in other bands like 800 MHz. Although half-duplex repeated operations are possible, operation is typically half-duplex base station or simplex operation. The total bandwidth available for use by public safety within the 30 MHz to 50 MHz band is 6.8 MHz. These are comprised of 25 KHz individual channel bandwidths. Primary user of low band spectrum within the SUASI region is the California Highway Patrol (CHP). Other users on a limited basis are Contra Costa County and the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (OES). The following chart outlines the available channel ranges along with groupings indicating total bandwidth for each grouping.

State Low-Band Interoperability Channels –Low-band channels currently assigned at the California State level are included in the California Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Radio System (CLEMARS) and designated CLEMARS channels 6 and 7 (39.46 MHz simplex and paired with 45.86 MHz for repeater operation. These channels follow the national interoperability plan as indicated in Table 5. Although there is a proposed Fire channels at 39.4800, currently there are no low-band channels in the current FIRESCOPE plan.

National Low-Band interoperability Channels – The following low-band channels are set aside for national interoperability and are designated with proposed common channel names14:

The following channels are available for low-band on a national interoperability basis. Included also are the recommended channel naming conventions for the low-band channels.15

14 http://www.npstc.org/documents/IO-0060B-20070612%20Standard%20Channel%20Nomenclature%20Final.pdf




January 30, 2008


Freq/FCC Channel (Subscriber Load)

Receive Transmit

Base, Mobile, or Fixed (Control)

Eligibility/Primary Use Common Name

Limitations (47 CFR Part 90)

MHz MHz FCC 30 MHz Public Safety Band

39.4600 SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

Law Enforcement LLAW1 90.20(c)(3)[15]


Fire (Proposed) LFIRE2 Prop 90.20(c)(3)[19]


Law Enforcement LLAW3 90.20(c)(3)[15]


Fire LFIRE4 90.20(c)(3)[19]

Table 5 - Low Band Interoperability Channels

With the exception of CHP, CA OES, and Contra Costa County low-band spectrum channels are not widely utilized. This is due to the many undesirable characteristics of low-band when considering propagation effects, such as skip and susceptibility to noise. Additionally, over the years a steady decrease in manufactured equipment at this band has been realized. Within the development of the overall interoperability plan, those channels that are considered important for the communications with agencies utilizing low-band communications infrastructure would best be suited by developing permanent channels allocated for the specific use of interoperability within the SUASI and facilitate its use through gateway technology.

3. 148-174 MHz (VHF)

Like Low Band, VHF High Band is also highly fragmented; along with the wider geographical propagation of this band are considered disadvantages in the planning for wide geographic re-use of this band. However, the fact that this band is fragmented from an FCC allocation perspective this fragmentation can be leveraged to provide interoperability channels that are both simplex and repeated. There is a total of 7.25 MHz available in spectrum to utilize for public safety.

VHF is also affected by the “FCC narrowbanding rules set forth in 1992 what is commonly known as the refarming notice, FCC PR Docket No. 92-235 that introduced plans for narrowbanding channels below 512 MHz…”16 The important date for planning is that no channels will be accepted for new license operating at the 25 kHz bandwidth after January 1, 2011. And as of today, the deadline for migration of all below 512 MHz operations at the 12.5 kHz operation is January 1, 2013.

16 “Narrowbanding, Below 512 MHz”, October 2006 Radio Resource/Mission Critical Magazine, written by Lincoln J. Unruh



January 30, 2008


State VHF Interoperability Channels – There are numerous VHF channels set aside for state-wide use. Between FIRESCOPE and CLEMARS there are 87 radio channels for state-wide interoperability, with a majority of these channels used for fire protection.17 Most of the same channels listed in FIRESCOPE and CLEMARS are also mentioned in the California State Interoperability Executive Committee (CALSIEC).

National Interoperability Channels – The national interoperability channels at VHF are common in the California State OES FIRESCOPE and CLEMARS systems. There are no new or unused channels mentioned in the national plan that are not in the FIRESCOPE or in CLEMARS.


Receive Transmit


Eligibility/Primary Use Common

Name Limitations

(47 CFR Part 90)

MHz MHz FCC 150-162 MHz Public

Safety Band


Any Public Safety Eligible VTAC11 90.20(c)(3)[80]


Fire VFIRE22 90.20(c)(3)[19]


Fire VFIRE24 90.20(c)(3)[19]


Fire VFIRE21 90.20(c)(3)[19]


Fire VFIRE25 90.20(c)(3)[19]


Fire VFIRE23 90.20(c)(3)[19]


Fire VFIRE26 90.20(c)(3)[19]




EMS VMED28 90.20(c)(3)[40]


EMS VMED29 90.20(c)(3)[40]


Law Enforcement VLAW31 90.20(c)(3)[41]

155.4825 SIMPLEX Base- Law Enforcement VLAW32 90.20(c)(3)[41]

17 California OES FIRESCOPE and CLEMARS and the CALSIEC Interoperability Channels Authorization Process list.



January 30, 2008



Mobile


Any Public Safety Eligible VCALL10 90.20(c)(3)[80,83

]









157.2500 Fixed-Mobile

VTAC17

161.8500

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

Allocated for Public Safety Use in 33 Inland VPC/EAs

VTAC17D

90.20(g)


VTAC18

161.8250

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

Allocated for Public Safety Use in 33 Inland VPC/EAs

VTAC18D

90.20(g)


VTAC19

161.8750 SIMPLEX Base-

Mobile

Allocated for Public Safety Use in 33 Inland VPC/EAs VTAC19D

90.20(g)

Table 6 - VHF Interoperability Channels

4. 450-512 MHz (UHF)

The UHF band includes a total of 3.775 MHz of channel availability for use within the overall SUASI. An additional 12 MHz is available to the San Francisco and Sacramento area with the addition of TV channels 16 and 17. These upper UHF TV channels (482.000 MHz to 488.000 MHz channel 16 and 488.000 MHz to 494.000 MHz channel 17) are commonly referred to as the T-Band channels. The UHF band is also subject to the FCC narrowbanding requirements of 2013.

State Interoperability Channels – CALSIEC identifies a total of 12 radio channels for interoperability. Of those 12 channels 4 are common to the national interoperability plan. 8 radio channels are unique to California with 2 channels specifically for interoperability in the Los Angeles region. The net result is a possibility of 6 UHF Channels to consider for use within the SUASI for interoperability.



January 30, 2008


National Interoperability Channels – As mentioned previously UHF national interoperability channels are part of the CALSIEC plan for interoperability. Below in Table 718 are the national interoperability channels and the recommended channel names for the UHF plan.


Receive Transmit



Name Limitations

(47 CFR Part 90)

MHz MHz FCC 450-470 MHz Public

Safety Band NPSTC


UCALL40

453.2125

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

Any Public Safety Eligible

UCALL40D

90.20(c)(3)[80,83]


UTAC41

453.4625

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile


UTAC41D

90.20(c)(3)[80]


UTAC42

453.7125

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile


UTAC42D

90.20(c)(3)[80]


UTAC43


Mobile


UTAC43D

90.20(c)(3)[80]

Table 7 - UHF Interoperability Channels

5. 763-805 MHz (700 MHz)

With scheduled auction #73 in January, 2008 for 700 MHz and the recent decision of the FCC to include rules that address the national interoperability issues of the public safety community, there have been significant modifications to the 700 MHz band-plan. The initial delay for most of California is that incumbent TV broadcasters continue to occupy this spectrum. However, Congress addressed this issue and passed law that requires all TV broadcast stations to vacate the spectrum no later than February 17, 2009.19


19 http://www.fcc.gov/



January 30, 2008


There is a total of 24 MHz available for public safety within this band. However, due to the recent changes made by the FCC only 10 MHz (two 5 MHz paired blocks) are actually usable within an infrastructure plan. The primary reason is that 2 MHz is set aside for guard-band protection while the other 12 MHz is proposed for the public/private partnership that will develop the Public Safety National Broadband System. The most significant change is the elimination of wideband specific channel allocation. The change includes arranging the channels in a block of narrowband specific channels and a block of broadband specific channels. The broadband specific channels are reserved for the National Broad-Band System.

The narrow band channels of 700 MHz can be utilized starting February 18, 2009. This should be a significant planning tool for the SUASI moving forward. The reassignment of channel usage within the current repacked band-plan will occur at the state level as done before. However, the SUASI has an opportunity to approach the Region 6 700 MHz planning committee with a comprehensive plan, as a group instead of as individuals. This would allow the SUASI to assign SUASI regional 700 MHz interoperability channels.

The SUASI will also benefit (if successful) from the national broadband system. Planning should include this system for matters of interoperability. The national broadband system is a developing program and a system should be implemented within SUASI to monitor progress so that understanding of how this system will best be leveraged by the SUASI for interoperability.

State Interoperability Channels – Currently there is no official plan for 700 MHz interoperability channels. This is due to the necessary repacking or re-assignment of 700 channels due to the FCC changes. When Region 6 determines how the final 700 MHz channel plan will be allocated, then the State can develop its 700 MHz interoperability channel plan.

National Interoperability Channels – Below in Table 8 is the latest version of the NPSTC national 700 MHz interoperability channels along with the common naming convention that has been adopted. With the exception of the naming convention, the remaining information is subject to change due to the FCC rule changes.


Receive Transmit

Base, Mobile, or

Fixed (Control)


Name Limitations

(47 CFR Part 90)

CHANNEL CHANNEL FCC 700 MHz Public Safety

Band (TV 63 & 68) NPSTC

983-984 Fixed-Mobile

7TAC51

23-24

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

General Public Safety Service (secondary trunked)

7TAC51D

90.531(a)(1)[iii]

999-1000 Fixed-Mobile

7CALL50

39-40

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

Calling Channel

7CALL50D

90.531(a)(1)[iii]

1023-1024

Fixed-Mobile

7MED65 63-64

SIMPLEX Base-

EMS

7MED65D



January 30, 2008


Mobile

1039-1040

Fixed-Mobile

7MED66

79-80

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

EMS

7MED66D

1063-1064

Fixed-Mobile

7TAC52

103-104

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

General Public Safety Service (secondary trunked)

7TAC52D

90.531(a)(1)[iii]

1079-1080

Fixed-Mobile

7TAC55

119-120

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile

General Public Safety Service

7TAC55D

1103-1104

Fixed-Mobile

7FIRE63

143-144 SIMPLEX Base-

Mobile

Fire

7FIRE63D

Table 8 - 700 MHz Interoperability Channels

6. 806/851-824/869 MHz (800 MHz)

The 800 MHz band has been undergoing a national rebanding effort for some years now. The SUASI is in the first of four waves for rebanding the 800 MHz channels nationally. At the conclusion of rebanding there will be 9.5 MHz available for public safety within the 800 MHz band. Chart 6 below shows the current (post-rebanding) channel allocation and total bandwidth.

The NPSPAC channels are defined on a regional basis and coordinated. There are an additional 70 channels outside of the NPSPAC channels that were previously allocated to public safety (12 groups of 5 channels for trunking and 10 single channels) that have been maintained in the FCC rules post-rebanding. Additionally, there is a possibility of additional channels opening up June of 2008.

The additional channels that could be available are those channels previously in the 1-120 block that become vacant due to non utilization and not reused by Sprint/Nextel to relocate incumbents into the expansion band. The FCC rule is that after these channels are vacated they will become publicly available in five years. However, the rule further indicates that the first three years to license this vacated spectrum is exclusive to public safety. It is unknown at the time of this writing how many channels will be vacated by Sprint/Nextel.

State Interoperability Channels – The FIRESCOPE and CLEMARS have channels allocated in the 800 MHz band for interoperability. FIRESCOPE utilizes the National calling channels (most commonly known as ICALL/ITAC). CLEMARS utilizes 4 channels, two of which are repeated with the remaining two channels simplex (from the repeated pairs).

National Interoperability Channels – The most common national interoperability channels for on the national plan are the commonly known (ICALL/ITAC). Although some other interoperability channels were



January 30, 2008


available for low-power use on an interoperability basis, it is unknown at this time if this channel survived re-banding. Below is the NPSTC common naming table along with the post-rebanding specific frequencies.


Receive Transmit



Name Limitations

(47 CFR Part 90)

MHz MHz FCC 800 MHz NPSPAC Band

(Post Rebanding) NPSTC


8CALL90

851.0125

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile


8CALL90D

90.16


8TAC91

851.5125

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile


8TAC91D

90.16


8TAC92

852.0125

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile


8TAC92D

90.16


8TAC93

852.5125

SIMPLEX Base-Mobile


8TAC93D

90.16


8TAC94


Mobile


8TAC94D

90.16

Table 9 - 800 MHz Interoperability Channels



January 30, 2008

Figure 8 - 800 MHz Allocation

20

7. 4940-4990 MHz

The FCC required that each NPSPAC region submit a plan on guidelines to be used for sharing the spectrum within the region. As such the regional plan should be considered when implementing future plans for interoperability.

State Interoperability Channels – There are no established interoperability plans for this spectrum, other than it is a common band with like channel structure. Due to the higher frequency, and lack of equipment for the mobile environment, fixed services are more likely to be utilized within this spectrum than mobile services.

National Interoperability Channels – There are no designated channels within this band for national interoperability.


20 http://www.motorola.com/governmentandenterprise/contentdir/en_US/Files/General/Overview_and_Status_of_Rebanding_05-02-07.pdf



January 30, 2008


8. Summary

The cooperation among the group has grown and this group strength should be further leveraged. The SUASI should consider the following basic recommendations when planning or starting discussions with regard to spectrum availability and interoperability.

VHF – all local agencies within the counties that frame the SUASI should determine any channels that could be made available on a county-wide basis in order to form a consistent five channel pairs of VHF for repeater operation. Do not rule out the possibility of relocating a particular licensee in this case.

UHF – Consider the possibility of approaching the FCC with waivers and look at the business band in UHF if no alternatives exist for the public safety spectrum in UHF to accomplish the same goal as VHF and that is to find five repeated pairs for use as permanent interoperability channels for use within the SUASI.

700 MHz – Develop as a group (10 counties that comprise the SUASI) a detailed 700 MHz plan that includes interoperability. If the SUASI approaches the 700 MHz Region 6 planning committee with a unified, well organized interconnected plan, the chance for success will be much greater in gaining acceptance as well as establishing perhaps an extensive interoperability spectrum structure.

800 MHz – Ensure that mechanisms are in place to watch for any spectrum that might become available due to vacated channels from rebanding.

4.9 GHz – Determine the overall importance of this band to general interoperability along with the flexibility of this band. It is uncertain at this time due in part to the lack of information within the SUASI what operational benefit 4.9 GHz will inherently provide.

Include discussions with federal users or partners, such as the Secret Service, FBI, or others that could possibly make interoperability channels available for use permanently within the SUASI. Although federal users are higher in the VHF range and lower in the UHF range, most equipment today will support the band difference at the VHF range.



January 30, 2008

Bay Area SUASI SUASI Strategic Plan draft (1-30-08)_1.doc C-1

Appendix C - Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Templates



January 30, 2008


MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

CONCERNING

THE ADVANCED REGIONAL DIGITAL INTEROPERABILITY NETWORK (ARDIN) FUNDING AND MAINTENANCE

THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING by and between the City and Counties of __________ (sometimes hereinafter referred to individually as an “Entity” and collectively as the “Entities”).

WHEREAS, (Cite applicable State statute) authorizes governments to cooperate and contract with one another to provide any function, service or facility lawfully authorized to each, including authority to provide for the joint exercise of such functions, services or facilities; and

WHEREAS, in the performance of their governmental functions, each Entity has obtained, through leases or purchases, certain radio and associated communications equipment which is part of a regional public safety Communications Network System (the “System”) consisting of certain trunked repeaters and related fixed equipment; and

WHEREAS, the Entities are authorized to utilize radio communications in the performance of their various governmental functions; and

WHEREAS, the Entities are desirous of cooperating to oversee the management of the System; and

WHEREAS, the Entities desire to continue to cooperate and contract with one another and with other Entities that may wish to become parties to this Agreement concerning the establishment of a joint board of directors to oversee funding and management of the System,

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the Entities agree as follows:

1. Establishment. There is hereby created an association of entities to be known as the Advanced Regional Digital Interoperability Network (ARDIN) for the purpose of coordinating and facilitating System activities and modifications. Each governmental entity located in San Francisco Bay Area that has subscriber units on the System, with approval of the Board, shall be entitled to membership in the ARDIN. Participation in the ARDIN shall be strictly voluntary.

2. Membership. Any governmental entity entitled to membership in the ARDIN may become a member of the ARDIN by providing the board of directors with documentation evidencing the



January 30, 2008


number of subscriber units which the entity has allocated on the System, and approved for membership by the Board and executing a counterpart copy of this Agreement and all subsequent amendments or addendums thereto.

3. Board of Directors. The ARDIN shall operate through a board of directors. Each member of the ARDIN having (insert number) or more subscriber units allocated shall be entitled to appoint one representative to the board of directors. Any member having less than (insert number) subscriber units allocated may join with other members having less than (insert number) subscriber units to establish a allocated (insert number) subscriber unit threshold and these members may appoint from among themselves a representative on the board of directors. No entity shall have more than one representative serving on the board of directors.

4. By-laws. The board of directors shall adopt by-laws setting forth the rules under which the board shall operate. Each member of the board shall have one vote.

5. Delegation of Authority to Board. The board of directors shall meet regularly for the purpose of reviewing the performance and operation of the System. Any decision made with a quorum and 2/3 vote of the board of directors then present with regard to the operation of the System shall be binding upon each Entity which is a signatory to this Agreement. By executing this Agreement, the governing body of each entity hereby delegates to the board of directors of the ARDIN the power and authority to make decisions concerning the operation of the System and conduct or cause to be conducted, an audit of the funds referenced in paragraphs 6 & 7.

6. Funding for Maintenance or Repair of the System. Each entity currently a member of the ARDIN and any new member joining pursuant to Section 2, shall make an annual monetary contribution, based on the number of subscriber units the entity has logged on the System, for the maintenance, repair or replacement of the System, as outlined by Addendum A. Entities becoming members after the original ARDIN association date of establishment may be assessed “start up fees” as outlined in appendix A of this agreement. The amount of the monetary contribution is to be determined annually by the board of directors. (Insert name of Entity’s Fiscal Agent) shall bill each entity and each entity shall pay the amount assessed in the first quarter of the fiscal year. Upon receipt of each entity’s contribution, (Fiscal Agent) shall hold all contributions and accumulated interest in an account for the ARDIN. (Fiscal Agent) is authorized to disburse money, including accrued interest, from the account only for costs incurred in maintaining and repairing the System and as indicated in section 7 below.

7. Funding for Expansion or Replacement of all or portions of the System. Any new member joining, pursuant to Section 2, shall make an initial monetary contribution in an amount, to be determined by the board of directors, outlined in Addendum A of this agreement. The Board shall consider waiving all or a portion of the initial monetary contribution for those new members that bring valuable infrastructure components to the System for use by all. The value of the infrastructure components is to be determined by the board of directors. A minimum percentage, to be determined by the board of directors, of the above account shall be held as capital reserve. The board at any time and from time to time may determine that an additional monetary contribution from each Entity is required to expand or replace all or a portion of the System. Each Entity shall make in full the amount of the additional monetary contribution so approved. (Fiscal



January 30, 2008


Agent) is authorized, at the direction of the Board, to disburse money from the capital reserve account to expand or replace all or portions of the System.

8. Joint Use and Operation. Infrastructure owned by an Entity is hereby made available for use by the System Entities as part of the System, but shall remain the property of said Entity. In the event that an entity or user causes any negative interference or otherwise causes disruption or damage to said infrastructure or the System, the Entity owning the infrastructure may restrict use of said infrastructure by the Entity causing interference, disruption or damage.

In the event that an entity owning infrastructure shared by other users of the System resigns or otherwise terminates this agreement, said Entity shall assume responsibility for the maintenance, repair, replacement and all other expenses or liabilities associated with ownership of that Entity's infrastructure.

9. Jurisdiction of Entity. Except as set forth in paragraph 5 concerning the delegation of the authority to make decisions concerning the operation of the System, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit the authority or jurisdiction of any Entity which is a member of the ARDIN.

10 Governmental Immunity. Each Entity which is a party to this Agreement is relying on, and does not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this Agreement, the monetary limitations or any other rights, immunities or protections provided by (cite appropriate state statute), as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to the Entity, its officers, or its employees.

11. Appropriations. All financial obligations of the parties to this Agreement, including but not limited to the funding obligations of paragraphs 6 and 7 hereof, are subject to budgeting and appropriation of such funds by the governing body of each party each fiscal year. This agreement, including but not limited to paragraphs 6 and 7 hereof, shall not be construed to create a multiple fiscal year debt or other financial obligation. Failure of an Entity to adequately fund agreed upon maintenance, repair and system replacement may result in sanctions as deemed by the Board of Directors, including but not limited to access to part or all of the system and denial or radio services, or expulsion from the ARDIN.

12. Resignation. Any Entity which is a member of the ARDIN may resign from the ARDIN at any time by providing thirty days prior written notice to the board of directors.

13. Notices. All notices required to be given under this Agreement shall be mailed first class, postage prepaid, or hand delivered to the addresses shown below:



January 30, 2008


Addendum A

1. Start Up Fees

New Members, defined by Section 2 and who operate within and on the ARDIN communication infrastructure and do not bring equivalent value infrastructure resources into ARDIN, as determined by the Board, will be charged the following per radio startup fees:

0 Talkgroup = $ 000.00 per unit

1 Talkgroup = $ 000.00 per unit

2 Talkgroups = $ 000.00 per unit

3 Talkgroups = $ 000.00 per unit

Assessed start up fees are to offset expansion costs required to handle the system load of new users. $00.00 per year/per unit will be assessed every year thereafter as noted below.

2. Maintenance and Upgrade Fees

All users, effective FY 20XX, will pay $00.00 per (radio) unit/per year for ARDIN site/infrastructure maintenance (to include but not limited to: labor, diagnostic services and response to site and connectivity repairs) and future system upgrade costs.

Date post:	12-Sep-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Strategic Plan Bay Area SUASI Interoperable Communications Project

Documents