Cities Index.
Agenda

Richmond City Council
November 18, 2025

Document
Agenda
Meeting
November 18, 2025
Body
Richmond City Council
Pages
784
Original file
267.3 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on pub-richmond.escribemeetings.com. That file is the official record.

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

FREQ NOT LISTED
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1616

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

FREQ NOT LISTED
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

FREQ NOT LISTED
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1617

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

FREQ NOT LISTED
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

FREQ NOT LISTED
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1618

MOTOTROLA
MTR2000
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

FREQ NOT LISTED
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1619
9/17/2008 JKNOWLES
Survey Date Surveyors Observed Position (NAD83)
Latitude(N) Longitude(W)
Site Access

RICHMOND PD/FD DISPATCH
Site Name Site Type
Telco T1's:

Comments:

Site Description
Compound room for
additional shelter:

Building Design Description
Has Fiber: Yes No
Other Tower(s) /
Comments:

Yes No

MICROWAVE ANTENNAS ON BUILDING DOWN THE STREET
Parking Adequate: Yes No
Fencing / Gate: Yes No Type: WALLED IN COURTYARD IN BACK Fire Suppression: Yes No Type:

Smoke Alarm: Yes No
Emergency Lighting: Yes No
POTS: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1620
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Outside Diminsions: 80 X 50
Prefab./Built on Site: BUILT ON SITE
Wall Construction: BLOCK
Roof Construction:

Floor Composition: TILE
Comments:

Outside Grounding System Description

UNKNOWN
Generator
Manufacturer: ONAN Model #: GENSET 485
Capacity: KVA:

Phase:

Transfer Switch
Manufacturer:

ONAN Model #:

Volts: Amps:

Comments:

Fuel System
Fuel Type: DIESEL # of Tanks: 1
Tank Size (gallons):

In-Ground / Above
Ground:

ABOVE
Comments: PEDESTAL TANK

EQUIPMENT ROOM INFORMATION
Electrical Panel
Power Rating:

Amps: 450 Volts: 120/240 Phase: 1
Comments: ROOM IS 10 X 50
HVAC
Manufacturer: Model #:

Cooling Tons: # of Units:

Description:

Grounding System
System Type: LINER
Description: EQUIPMENT GROUNDED
Surge Suppression Devices:

UPS System
Manufacturer: UNITY Model #: 360
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Comments: (Rate) Great Good Average Poor
1 CONFIDENTIAL
1621
# of Units:

Condition / Comments:

Alarm
Manufacturer: Model #:

Type / Condition /Comments:

Describe
Floor Space:

Transmission Line Entry
Total Ports: # of Ports Used:

ENTRY UNDER RAISED FLOOR
Description / Comments:

Additional
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
kVA: Batt. Capacity

CONFIDENTIAL
1622
9/15/2008 JKNOWLES
Survey Date Surveyors Observed Position (NAD83)
Latitude(N) Longitude(W)
Site Access

ROCKY RIDGE RF/MW
Site Name Site Type
Telco T1's: NO
Comments: SITE NOT OWNED BY COUNTY, OWNED BY AMERICAN TOWER Site Description
Compound room for
additional shelter:

THERE IS ROOM FOR ANOTHER SHELTER
Building Design Description
Has Fiber: Yes No
Other Tower(s) /
Comments:

Yes No

ONE TOWER ON SITE
Parking Adequate: Yes No
Fencing / Gate: Yes No Type: CHAIN LINK, OLD, POOR CONDITION Fire Suppression: Yes No Type:

Smoke Alarm: Yes No
Emergency Lighting: Yes No
POTS: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1623
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Outside Diminsions:

Prefab./Built on Site: BUILT ON SITE
Wall Construction: BLOCK
Roof Construction: METAL
Floor Composition: CONCRETE
Comments: COUNTY IS REMOVING DIVIDING WALL FOR MORE SPACE Outside Grounding System Description

GROUNG CABLES CLAMPED
Generator
Manufacturer: OLYMIPAN Model #: D45F1S
Capacity: KVA:

Phase:

Transfer Switch
Manufacturer:

GENERAC Model #: GTS 105
Volts: Amps:

Comments:

Fuel System
Fuel Type: PROPANE # of Tanks: 2
Tank Size (gallons):

In-Ground / Above
Ground:

ABOVE
Comments:
200
GUYED
1010559

ONE LIGHT, ONE STROBE
Tower Height:

Manufacturer:

Tower Type:

ASR
Registration:

Lighting:

Tower Paint:

Climbing: Cable

TOWER INFORMATION
Model #:

Verticle Cable Ladder:

NO PAINT
# of Legs: 1
Ladder
Ground System SINGLE POINT
Type:

Transmission Cable Ground
Yes No
Good Poor
Ground Sys. Condition: (Comments - Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1624
MW: NO
MW: NO
MW: NO
Coax: NO
Coax: NO
Coax: NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Twr.

Bottom
Building
Entry
Near
Antenna Comments:

Roof Mount
Access:

Additional
Comments:

EQUIPMENT ROOM INFORMATION
Electrical Panel
Power Rating:

Amps: 125 Volts: 240/120 Phase: 1
Comments: ROOM IS NEAR FULL, COUNTY IS REMOVING DIVIDING WALL FOR MORE SPACE HVAC
Manufacturer: BARD Model #: WL6023A0ZBNXXXJ
Cooling Tons: # of Units:

WALLMOUNT HVAC UNIT
Description:

Grounding System
System Type: LINEAR
Description: GROUND LINES RUN TO BUS BAR
Surge Suppression Devices:

UPS System
Manufacturer: Model #:
# of Units:

Condition / Comments:

Alarm
Manufacturer: Model #:

CONNECTED TO MICROWAVE
Type / Condition /Comments:

Describe
Floor Space:

Transmission Line Entry
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Comments: (Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
1 kVA: Batt. Capacity

CONFIDENTIAL
1625
Total Ports: 27 # of Ports Used: 21
8 - 2"PORTS, 12 -1" PORTS, 7-4" PORTS
Description / Comments:

Additional
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
488.9125

KENWOOD
TKR-740/840
491.9125
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
488.4375

KENWOOD
TKR-740/840
491.4375
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1626
155.31

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
155.625
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
159.735

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
154.205
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1627
160.110

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
151.025
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
155.04

MOTOROLA
MITREK
155.04
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1628
153.995

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR
154.995
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

44.64 MIDLAND

44.64 Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

FAIR
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1629
855.9875

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR
810.9875
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
851.9625

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR
806.9625
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1630
155.25

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
155.955
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
Manufacturer: HARRIS
Model #: BCK9GKDVM11-4564-1
Frequency Band:

Radio Configuration:

MICROWAVE / FIBER EQUIPMENT INFORMATION
MW Owner: CC COUNTY
Digital, DS1 Capacity
Main Ant. Height:

Comments:

Analog: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1631
Main Ant. Diameter:

Diversity Ant. Height
Diversity Ant. Dia.:

Multiplexer Manuf.: Model #:

Multiplexer Type: Capacity:

Chan. Band Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Type:

DC Charger Volts: Amps:

Condition:

Condition:

Volts:

Type:

Amp/Hr. Rating:

MW Condition /
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
FOT. Owner:

System Configuration
FOT. Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity:

Interface Cards Number of
Cards
Unused Slots
FOT. Condition
/ Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Router / Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Dehydrator: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1632
Manufacturer: HARRIS
Model #: HRS-CX-11G155M
Frequency Band:

Radio Configuration:

MICROWAVE / FIBER EQUIPMENT INFORMATION
MW Owner: CC COUNTY
Digital, DS1 Capacity
Main Ant. Height:

Main Ant. Diameter:

Diversity Ant. Height
Diversity Ant. Dia.:

Multiplexer Manuf.: Model #:

Multiplexer Type: Capacity:

Chan. Band Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Type:

Comments:

DC Charger Volts: Amps:

Condition:

Condition:

Volts:

Type:

Amp/Hr. Rating:

MW Condition /
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
FOT. Owner:

System Configuration
FOT. Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity:

Interface Cards Number of
Cards
Unused Slots
Analog: Yes No
Router / Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Dehydrator: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1633
FOT. Condition
/ Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1634
Manufacturer: HARRIS
Model #: BCK9GKDVM10-8T-2
Frequency Band:

Radio Configuration:

MICROWAVE / FIBER EQUIPMENT INFORMATION
MW Owner: CC COUNTY
Digital, DS1 Capacity
Main Ant. Height:

Main Ant. Diameter:

Diversity Ant. Height
Diversity Ant. Dia.:

Multiplexer Manuf.: Model #:

Multiplexer Type: Capacity:

Chan. Band Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Type:

Comments:

DC Charger Volts: Amps:

Condition:

Condition:

Volts:

Type:

Amp/Hr. Rating:

MW Condition /
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
FOT. Owner:

System Configuration
FOT. Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity:

Interface Cards Number of
Cards
Unused Slots
Analog: Yes No
Router / Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Dehydrator: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1635
FOT. Condition
/ Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1636
Manufacturer: HARRIS
Model #: HRS5211-0000OC3128QS
Frequency Band:

Radio Configuration:

MICROWAVE / FIBER EQUIPMENT INFORMATION
MW Owner: CC COUNTY
Digital, DS1 Capacity
Main Ant. Height:

Main Ant. Diameter:

Diversity Ant. Height
Diversity Ant. Dia.:

Multiplexer Manuf.: Model #:

Multiplexer Type: Capacity:

Chan. Band Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Type:

Comments:

DC Charger Volts: Amps:

Condition:

Condition:

Volts:

Type:

Amp/Hr. Rating:

MW Condition /
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
FOT. Owner:

System Configuration
FOT. Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity:

Interface Cards Number of
Cards
Unused Slots
Analog: Yes No
Router / Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Dehydrator: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1637
FOT. Condition
/ Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1638
9/16/2008 JKNOWLES
Survey Date Surveyors Observed Position (NAD83)
Latitude(N) Longitude(W)
Site Access

SAN RAMON VALLEY FIRE DISPATCH/MW/RF
Site Name Site Type
Telco T1's:

Comments:

Site Description
Compound room for
additional shelter:

NO
Building Design Description
Has Fiber: Yes No
Other Tower(s) /
Comments:

Yes No

ONE TOWER ON SITE
Parking Adequate: Yes No
Fencing / Gate: Yes No Type:

Fire Suppression: Yes No Type: SPRINKLERS
Smoke Alarm: Yes No
Emergency Lighting: Yes No
POTS: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1639
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Outside Diminsions: 150 X 100
Prefab./Built on Site: BUILT ON SITE
Wall Construction: BLOCK/ CONCRETE/METAL
Roof Construction: METAL
Floor Composition: CONCRETE
Comments:

Outside Grounding System Description

TOWER WAS GROUNDED
Generator
Manufacturer: SDMO Model #: G100U
Capacity: 80 KVA: 80
Phase:

Transfer Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Volts: Amps:

Comments: DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO GENERATOR OR TRANSFER SWITCH Fuel System
Fuel Type: PROPANE # of Tanks:

Tank Size (gallons):

In-Ground / Above
Ground:

Comments: DID NOT HAVE ACCESS
50 SELF SUPPORTING
NONE
Tower Height:

Manufacturer:

Tower Type:

ASR
Registration:

Lighting:

Tower Paint:

Climbing: Cable

TOWER INFORMATION
Model #:

Verticle Cable Ladder:

NO PAINT
# of Legs: 3
Ladder
Ground System MULTI POINT
Type:

Transmission Cable Ground
Yes No
Good Poor
Ground Sys. Condition: (Comments - Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1640
MW: YES
MW: YES
MW: YES
Coax: YES
Coax: YES
Coax: YES
Twr.

Bottom
Building
Entry
Near
Antenna Comments:

Roof Mount
Access:

Additional
Comments:

EQUIPMENT ROOM INFORMATION
Electrical Panel
Power Rating:

Amps: 100 Volts: 208Y/120 Phase: 3
Comments: 15 total racks, ups in room, batteries
HVAC
Manufacturer: Model #:

Cooling Tons: # of Units:

Description:

Grounding System
System Type: LINEAR
Description: MOST EQUIPMENT NOT GROUNDED
Surge Suppression Devices:

UPS System
Manufacturer: LIBERT Model #: NFINITY
# of Units: 1
Condition / Comments:

Alarm
Manufacturer: Model #:

Type / Condition /Comments:

Describe the room is a L-shaped room 10 x 20 ft, and 12 x 15 Floor Space:

Transmission Line Entry
Total Ports: # of Ports Used:

Description / Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Comments: (Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
2 kVA: Batt. Capacity

CONFIDENTIAL
1641

CONDUIT ENTRY TO ROOM
Additional
Comments:

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR
154.995
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
155.955
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1642

KENWOOD
TKR-740/840
491.4375
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

KENWOOD
TKR-740/840
491.9125
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1643
motorola
MI225
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

FREQS NOT LISTED
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
Manufacturer: HARRIS
Model #:

Frequency Band:

Radio Configuration:

MICROWAVE / FIBER EQUIPMENT INFORMATION
MW Owner: CC COUNTY
Digital, DS1 Capacity
Main Ant. Height:

Main Ant. Diameter:

Diversity Ant. Height
Diversity Ant. Dia.:

Multiplexer Manuf.: Model #:

Multiplexer Type: Capacity:

Chan. Band Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Type:

Comments:

DC Charger Volts: Amps:

MW Condition /
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Analog: Yes No
Router / Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Dehydrator: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1644
Condition:

Condition:

Volts:

Type:

Amp/Hr. Rating:

FOT. Owner:

System Configuration
FOT. Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity:

Interface Cards Number of
Cards
Unused Slots
FOT. Condition
/ Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1645
9/18/2008 JKNOWLES
Survey Date Surveyors Observed Position (NAD83)
Latitude(N) Longitude(W)
Site Access

SHADYBROOK RF/MW
Site Name Site Type
Telco T1's: NO
Comments:

Site Description
Compound room for
additional shelter:

POSSIBLE ROOM FOR ANOTHER SHELTER
Building Design Description
Has Fiber: Yes No
Other Tower(s) /
Comments:

Yes No
THE TOWER IS SIX 10 FT POLES AT THE TOP OF THE HILL 300 FT FOR SHELTER Parking Adequate: Yes No
Fencing / Gate: Yes No Type: CHAINLINK
Fire Suppression: Yes No Type:

Smoke Alarm: Yes No
Emergency Lighting: Yes No
POTS: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1646
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Outside Diminsions: 18 X 14
Prefab./Built on Site: PREFAB
Wall Construction: FIBERGLASS
Roof Construction: FIBERGLASS
Floor Composition:

Comments: FLOOR TILED
Outside Grounding System Description

BUILDING GROUNDED
Generator
Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity: KVA:

Phase:

Transfer Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Volts: Amps:

Comments: NONE
Fuel System
Fuel Type: # of Tanks:

Tank Size (gallons):

In-Ground / Above
Ground:

Comments: NONE
10 POLE
NONE
Tower Height:

Manufacturer:

Tower Type:

ASR
Registration:

Lighting:

Tower Paint:

Climbing: Cable

TOWER INFORMATION
Model #:

Verticle Cable Ladder:

SIX 10' POLES ON HILL TOP
# of Legs: 1
Ladder
Ground System RING
Type:

EACH POLE GROUNDED
Yes No
Good Poor
Ground Sys. Condition: (Comments - Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1647
Transmission Cable Ground
MW:

MW:

MW:

Coax:

Coax:

Coax:
not able to tell due to cables under ground, not grounded near antenna not able to tell due to cables under ground, not grounded near antenna not able to tell due to cables under ground, not grounded near antenna not able to tell due to cables under ground, not grounded near antenna not able to tell due to cables under ground, not grounded near antenna not able to tell due to cables under ground, not grounded near antenna Twr.

Bottom
Building
Entry
Near
Antenna Comments:

Roof Mount
Access:

Additional
Comments:

EQUIPMENT ROOM INFORMATION
Electrical Panel
Power Rating:

Amps: 50 Volts: 240/120 Phase: 1
Comments: PULLING POWER FROM WATER TANK NEXT TO SHELTER HVAC
Manufacturer: BARD Model #: WA241-A10
Cooling Tons: # of Units: 2

WALL MOUNT
Description:

Grounding System
System Type: HALO
Description: GOOD GROUNDING, GROUNDING TO DOOR IS BROKEN Surge Suppression Devices:

TRANSMISSION LINES, MW LINES, AND AC HAVE SURGE SUPPRESSION UPS System
Manufacturer: Model #:
# of Units:

NONE
Condition / Comments:

Alarm
Manufacturer: Model #:

NONE
Type / Condition /Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Comments: (Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
1 kVA: Batt. Capacity

CONFIDENTIAL
1648

HAS OPEN SPACE FOR MORE RACKS, AND OPEN SPACE IN RACKS, WOULD NEED POWER

UPGRADE TO SUPPORT MORE EQUIPMENT
Describe
Floor Space:

Transmission Line Entry
Total Ports: 8 # of Ports Used: 6
EIGHT 3" PORTS FROM UNDER BUILDING
Description / Comments:

Additional
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor

MOTOROLA
MTR2000

ASTRON PS
155.64
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna 10
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: DECIBEL Model: DB4001-2
Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

MOTOROLA
MTR2000

ASTRON PS
155.955
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna 10
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1649
489.4375

KENWOOD

ASTRON PS
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna 10
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: TELEWAVE # of Channels: 2
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
460.1750

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR
LORTAN
465.1750
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna 10
Height:

RX Antenna 10
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1650

MOTOROLA
MTR2000

ASTRON PS
154.205
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna 10
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: BECIBEL Model: db4001-2
Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:
good
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

KENWOOD

ASTRON PS
491.9125
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna 10
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: TELEWAVE # of Channels: 2
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1651
460.3750

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR

ASTRON PS
465.3750
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna 10
Height:

RX Antenna 10
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
851.9625

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR

ASTRON PS
806.9625
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna 10
Height:

RX Antenna 10
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
Manufacturer: STRATEX NETWORKS
Model #: DART DS1
Frequency Band:

Radio Configuration:

MICROWAVE / FIBER EQUIPMENT INFORMATION
MW Owner:

Digital, DS1 Capacity
Comments:

Analog: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1652
Main Ant. Height:

Main Ant. Diameter:

Diversity Ant. Height
Diversity Ant. Dia.:

Multiplexer Manuf.: Model #:

Multiplexer Type: Capacity:

Chan. Band Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Type:

DC Charger Volts: Amps:

Condition:

Condition:

Volts:

Type:

Amp/Hr. Rating:

MW Condition /
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
FOT. Owner:

System Configuration
FOT. Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity:

Interface Cards Number of
Cards
Unused Slots
FOT. Condition
/ Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Router / Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Dehydrator: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1653
9/15/2008 JKNOWLES
Survey Date Surveyors Observed Position (NAD83)
Latitude(N) Longitude(W)
Site Access

SYDNEY RF
Site Name Site Type
Telco T1's: NO
Comments: SMALL SHELTER, SHELTER AT THE EDGE OF HILL SIDE Site Description
Compound room for
additional shelter:

NEXT TO OLD WATER TANK,
Building Design Description
Has Fiber: Yes No
Other Tower(s) /
Comments:

Yes No

MAY LOSE SITE WHEN TANK IS REMOVED, SOON
Parking Adequate: Yes No
Fencing / Gate: Yes No Type:

Fire Suppression: Yes No Type:

Smoke Alarm: Yes No
Emergency Lighting: Yes No
POTS: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1654
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Outside Diminsions: 14 X 8
Prefab./Built on Site: PREFAB
Wall Construction: METAL
Roof Construction: METAL
Floor Composition: CEMENTE
Comments: BUILDING IS SMALL
Outside Grounding System Description

BUILDING IS GROUNDED AT ONE POINT
Generator
Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity: KVA:

Phase:

Transfer Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Volts: Amps:

Comments: NONE
Fuel System
Fuel Type: # of Tanks:

Tank Size (gallons):

In-Ground / Above
Ground:

Comments: NONE
30 MONOPOLE
NONE
Tower Height:

Manufacturer:

Tower Type:

ASR
Registration:

Lighting:

Tower Paint:

Climbing: Cable

TOWER INFORMATION
Model #:

Verticle Cable Ladder:

NO PAINT
# of Legs: 1
Ladder
Ground System
Type:

TOWER GROUND OK
Yes No
Good Poor
Ground Sys. Condition: (Comments - Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1655
Transmission Cable Ground
MW:

MW:

MW:

Coax:

Coax:

Coax:

NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Twr.

Bottom
Building
Entry
Near
Antenna Comments:

Roof Mount
Access:

Additional
Comments:

EQUIPMENT ROOM INFORMATION
Electrical Panel
Power Rating:

Amps: 125 Volts: 240/120 Phase: 1
Comments: ROOM 13 X 7
HVAC
Manufacturer: Model #:

Cooling Tons: # of Units: 2

WINDOW UNITS UNITS WORKING WELL, VERY SMALL SPACE
Description:

Grounding System
System Type: LINER
Description: EQUIPMENT GROUNDED TO BUS BAR
Surge Suppression Devices:

UPS System
Manufacturer: Model #:
# of Units:

NONE
Condition / Comments:

Alarm
Manufacturer: Model #:

Type / Condition /Comments:

Describe TWO CABINETS IN THE BACK, 3 LONG THE SIDE, TIGHT Floor Space:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Comments: (Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
2 kVA: Batt. Capacity

CONFIDENTIAL
1656
Transmission Line Entry
Total Ports: 8 # of Ports Used: 6
3 CONDUITS RUNING TO TOWER, THREE 4" PORTS
Description / Comments:

Additional
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor

MOTOROLA
MTR2000

ASTRON PS
154.995
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna 20
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
151.025
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1657

MOTOROLA
MTR 2000
155.955
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: TELEWAVE Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
453.425

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
458.425
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: TELEWAVE # of Channels: 2
Multicoupler Manufacturer: TELEWAVE Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1658

MOTOROLA
GM300

ASTRON PS
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
488.6125

KENWOOD
ASTRON
491.6125
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: TELEWAVE # of Channels: 2
Multicoupler Manufacturer: TELEWAVE Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1659

KENWOOD
491.9125
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: TELEWAVE Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

KENWOOD

ASTRON PS
491.4375
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: TELEWAVE Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1660
9/17/2008 JKNOWLES
Survey Date Surveyors Observed Position (NAD83)
Latitude(N) Longitude(W)
Site Access

TOURQUOISE RF/MW
Site Name Site Type
Telco T1's: NO
Comments: SHELTER AND GENERATOR HAVE BEEN TAGED
Site Description
Compound room for
additional shelter:

NO ROOM FOR ANOTHER SHELTER
Building Design Description
Has Fiber: Yes No
Other Tower(s) /
Comments:

Yes No

SECOND TOWER IN SECOND COMPOUND
Parking Adequate: Yes No
Fencing / Gate: Yes No Type: GOOD, CHAINLINK
Fire Suppression: Yes No Type:

Smoke Alarm: Yes No
Emergency Lighting: Yes No
POTS: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1661
Manufacturer: FIBREBOND WEST
Model #:

Outside Diminsions: 10 X 20
Prefab./Built on Site: PREFAB
Wall Construction: CEMENT
Roof Construction: RUBBER
Floor Composition: TILE
Comments:

Outside Grounding System Description

WITH GROUND WELL
Generator
Manufacturer: ONAN Model #:

Capacity: KVA:

Phase:

Transfer Switch
Manufacturer:

ONAN Model #: LTD-3378498
Volts: 240 Amps: 200
Comments:

Fuel System
Fuel Type: DIESEL # of Tanks: 1
Tank Size (gallons):

In-Ground / Above
Ground:

IN-GROUND
Comments:
50 MONOPOLE
NONE
Tower Height:

Manufacturer:

Tower Type:

ASR
Registration:

Lighting:

Tower Paint:

Climbing: Cable

TOWER INFORMATION
Model #:

Verticle Cable Ladder:

NO PAINT
# of Legs: 1
Ladder
Ground System SINGLE POINT
Type:

Transmission Cable Ground
Yes No
Good Poor
Ground Sys. Condition: (Comments - Rate) Great Good Average Poor

CONFIDENTIAL
1662
MW: YES
MW: YES
MW: YES
Coax: YES
Coax: YES
Coax: YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Twr.

Bottom
Building
Entry
Near
Antenna Comments:

Roof Mount 3 ANTENNA MOUNTED ON ROOF
Access:

Additional
Comments:

EQUIPMENT ROOM INFORMATION
Electrical Panel
Power Rating:

Amps: 200 Volts: 120/240 Phase: 1
Comments: ROOM IS 9 X 19
HVAC
Manufacturer: BARD Model #: WA360-A05
Cooling Tons: 3 # of Units: 1
Description:

Grounding System
System Type: HALO
Description:

Surge Suppression Devices:

UPS System
Manufacturer: BEST POWER Model #: FE
# of Units: 1
Condition / Comments:

Alarm
Manufacturer: Model #:

Type / Condition /Comments:

Describe
Floor Space:

Transmission Line Entry
Total Ports: 5 # of Ports Used: 5
Description / Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Comments: (Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
1 kVA: Batt. Capacity

CONFIDENTIAL
1663
5 - 4" PORTS
Additional
Comments:
867.6250
MA/COM

EDACS MASTR III
822.6250
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: dbSPECTRA # of Channels: 8
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
867.1000
MA/COM

EDACS MASTR III
822.1000
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: dbSPECTRTRA # of Channels: 8
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1664
866.7500
MA/COM

EDACS MASTR III
821.7500
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: dbSPECTRA # of Channels: 8
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
866.1000
MA/COM

EDACS MASTR III
821.1000
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: dbSPECTRA # of Channels: 8
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1665
868.4125

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR
823.4126
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
859.4625

MOTOROLA

QUANTAR
814.4625
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1666
860.7125
MA/COM

EDACS MASTR III
815.7125
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: dbSPECTRA # of Channels: 8
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
868.6125
MA/COM

EDACS MASTR III
823.6125
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: dbSPECTRA # of Channels: 8
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1667
868.8625
MA/COM

EDACS MASTR III
822.8625
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: dbSPECTRA # of Channels: 8
Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No

MOTOROLA
MTR2000
Manufacturer:

Model:

Power Source:

Transmit (MHz)
Call Sign:

Transmit Pwr. (watts):

Receive (MHz):

LAND MOBILE RADIO INFORMATION
TX Antenna
Height:

RX Antenna
Height:

Combiner Manufacturer: # of Channels:

Multicoupler Manufacturer: Model:

Twr. Top Amp: Manuf:

GOOD
Radio Condition
ERP (watts):

Yes No
Manufacturer: GLENAYRE
Model #: 4T-6
Frequency Band:

Radio Configuration:

MICROWAVE / FIBER EQUIPMENT INFORMATION
MW Owner: RICHMOND
Digital, DS1 Capacity
Comments:

Analog: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1668
Main Ant. Height:

Main Ant. Diameter:

Diversity Ant. Height
Diversity Ant. Dia.:

Multiplexer Manuf.: Model #:

Multiplexer Type: Capacity:

Chan. Band Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Manuf.: Model #:

Alarm Sys. Type:

DC Charger Volts: Amps:

Condition:

Condition:

Volts:

Type:

Amp/Hr. Rating:

MW Condition /
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
FOT. Owner:

System Configuration
FOT. Manufacturer: Model #:

Capacity:

Interface Cards Number of
Cards
Unused Slots
FOT. Condition
/ Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Router / Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Dehydrator: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1669
9/15/2006 JKNOWLES
Survey Date Surveyors Observed Position (NAD83)
Latitude(N) Longitude(W)
Site Access

WALNUT CREEK DISPATCH
Site Name Site Type
Telco T1's: YES
Comments:

Site Description
Compound room for
additional shelter:

NO
Building Design Description
Has Fiber: Yes No
Other Tower(s) /
Comments:

Yes No

NO TOWER ON SITE
Parking Adequate: Yes No
Fencing / Gate: Yes No Type:

Fire Suppression: Yes No Type: FM-200
Smoke Alarm: Yes No
Emergency Lighting: Yes No
POTS: Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL
1670
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Outside Diminsions: 250 X 200
Prefab./Built on Site: BUILT ON SITE
Wall Construction: BLOCK
Roof Construction: RUBBER
Floor Composition: CONCRETE
Comments:

Outside Grounding System Description

UNKNOWN
Generator
Manufacturer: CUMMINGS Model #:

Capacity: KVA:

Phase:

Transfer Switch
Manufacturer:

Model #:

Volts: Amps:

Comments:

Fuel System
Fuel Type: DIESEL # of Tanks: 1
Tank Size (gallons):

In-Ground / Above
Ground:

IN-GROUND
Comments:

EQUIPMENT ROOM INFORMATION
Electrical Panel
Power Rating:

Amps: 225 Volts: 120/240 Phase: 1
Comments: 15 RACKS, 8 CABINETS
HVAC
Manufacturer: Model #:

Cooling Tons: # of Units:

Description:

Grounding System
System Type: LINEAR
Description:

Surge Suppression Devices:

UPS System
Manufacturer: MITSUBISHI Model #: 2033A
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
Comments: (Rate) Great Good Average Poor
2 CONFIDENTIAL
1671
# of Units: 1
Condition / Comments:

Alarm
Manufacturer: Model #:

Type / Condition /Comments:

Describe
Floor Space:

Transmission Line Entry
Total Ports: # of Ports Used:

ENTRY THROUGH CONDUIT
Description / Comments:

Additional
Comments:
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
(Rate) Great Good Average Poor
kVA: Batt. Capacity

CONFIDENTIAL
1672
Logging Recorder Manuf.: DICTAPHONE
Equipment Room Details: 6 RACKS-2 CABINETS, - 10 X 14, ROOM IS FULL 2 CABINETS, 15 X 15, ROOM HAS ADOUT 8 FT OF SPACE FOR MORE EQUIPMENT Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: ANTIOCH
County: Contra Costa
Surveyor: Jknowles
Survey Date: 9/18/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description 30 X 20 FULL
Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type:

Equipment Grounding
Description:

Surge Suppression Devices:

Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: EPE TECHNOLOGIES Model #: EPS-2000
# of Units: 1 kVA: Battery Capacity:

Condition and Comments:

Model #:

Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1673
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 5 # of Call Taker Only Positions # of Supervisor Positions:

Agencies Dispatched: ANTIOCH PD, BRENTWOOD
# of Spare Positions: 1
Notes:

Channel Capacity: 32 # of Channels Used: 10
Comments:

Fire Station Alerting Make Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: Model:

Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type gold elite
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):

Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: Model #:

Notes:

Racks:

Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 6
Notes: MONITOR- SECURITY CAM
Dispatch/Radio Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
RADIO
PHONE
CAD
CAD
CAD
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1674
# of Positions
# of Positions
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Call Taker Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Supervisor Position Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous 6 20" DISPLAYS, 2 32" DISPLAYS, FAX
Equipment:

Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1675
Logging Recorder Manuf.: CAPTURE
Equipment Room Details: 24-RACKS, 6 CABINETS, 20 X 40
SEVER ROOM -7 CABNETS, 20 x
Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: CCC SHERIFF
County: CONTRA COSTA
Surveyor: JKNOWLES
Survey Date: 9/16/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description 30 X 60
Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type: LINEAR
Equipment Grounding
Description:

Surge Suppression Devices:

Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: EMERSON Model #: AP51A
# of Units: 1 kVA: 80 Battery Capacity:

Condition and Comments: GOOD
Model #:

Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1676
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 15 # of Call Taker Only Positions # of Supervisor Positions: 2
Agencies Dispatched:
# of Spare Positions: 8
Notes:

Channel Capacity: # of Channels Used:

Comments:

Fire Station Alerting Make Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: SPECRA COM Model:

Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):

Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: MOTOROLA Model #:

Notes:

Racks: 8
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 23
Notes:

Dispatch/Radio Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application

RADIO/COMM
CAD
CAD

MAPPING-NOT USE, BAD GIS
PHONE
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1677
# of Positions
# of Positions 2
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Call Taker Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application

RADIO/COMM
CAD
CAD

MAPPING-NOT USE, BAD GIS
PHONE
Supervisor Position
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous
Equipment:

Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make: MOTOROLA
Console Model # GOLD ELITE

CONFIDENTIAL
1678
Logging Recorder Manuf.:

Equipment Room Details: 3 CABINETS - 1 RACK, HAS BIG DESK IN ROOM, ROOM IS 12 X 10 1 RACK, 2 CABINETS, AND UPS ROOM IS 10 X 12
Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: CONCORD PD
County: CONTRA COSTA
Surveyor: JKNOWLES
Survey Date: 9/16/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description ROOM IS 30 X 20, LITTLE SPACE AVAILABLE Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type:

Equipment Grounding
Description:

DISPATCH EQUIPMENT NOT GROUNDED
Surge Suppression Devices:

Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: LIEBERT Model #:
# of Units: kVA: Battery Capacity:

Condition and Comments:

Model #:

Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1679
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 7 # of Call Taker Only Positions # of Supervisor Positions:

Agencies Dispatched: CONCORD, CLAYTON
# of Spare Positions:

Notes:

Channel Capacity: # of Channels Used:

Comments:

Fire Station Alerting Make Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: Model:

Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):

Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: MOTOROLA Model #:

Notes:

Racks:

Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 7
Notes:

Dispatch/Radio Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
RADIO
CAD
GIS
CAD
PHONE
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1680
# of Positions
# of Positions
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Call Taker Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Supervisor Position Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous FAX, 3 - 27" TVs,
Equipment:

Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1681
Logging Recorder Manuf.: NICE LOG RECORDER
Equipment Room Details: 3 ROOM, 5 CABINETS-SERVER ROOM - 10 X 15 7 RACKS, 1 CABINET - SECOND ROOM - 15 X 20
5 RACKS - THIRD ROOM - 12 X 10
Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: CONSOLIDATED FIRE
County: CONTRA COSTA
Surveyor: JKNOWLES
Survey Date: 9/16/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description 40 X 30
Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type:

Equipment Grounding
Description:

Surge Suppression Devices:

Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: BEST POWER Model #: FE
# of Units: 1 kVA: Battery Capacity:

Condition and Comments:

Model #:

Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1682
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 9 # of Call Taker Only Positions # of Supervisor Positions:

Agencies Dispatched:
# of Spare Positions:

Notes:

Channel Capacity: 64 # of Channels Used:

Comments: P25 COMPLIANT
Fire Station Alerting Make ZETRON Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: Model:

Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type GOLDEN ELITE
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):
6 TRUNKS
Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: MOTOROLA Model #:

Notes:

Racks:

Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 9
Notes:

Dispatch/Radio Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
RADIO
CAD
PHONE
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1683
# of Positions
# of Positions
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Call Taker Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Supervisor Position Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous 4-42" MONITORS
Equipment:

Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1684
Logging Recorder Manuf.: DICTAPHONE
Equipment Room Details: 1 RACK, 1 CABINET, BULT IN SHELVES, DESK. ROOM IS 10 BY 15, BUT NEED TO BE

ORGANIZED
Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: PINOLE PD
County: CONTRA COSTA
Surveyor: JKNOWLES
Survey Date: 9/16/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description
Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type:

Equipment Grounding
Description:

POOR
Surge Suppression Devices:

Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: BEST POWER Model #: FE
# of Units: kVA: Battery Capacity:

Condition and Comments:

Model #:

Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1685
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 2 # of Call Taker Only Positions # of Supervisor Positions:

Agencies Dispatched:
# of Spare Positions: 1
Notes:

Channel Capacity: # of Channels Used:

Comments:

Fire Station Alerting Make Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: Model:

Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):

Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: Model #:

Notes:

Racks:

Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 3
Notes: GIS BAD
Dispatch/Radio Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application

SECURITY CAMS
RADIO
CAD
GIS
PHONE
Console Make: ERICSSON
Console Model # ERICSSON

CONFIDENTIAL
1686
# of Positions
# of Positions
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Call Taker Position Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Supervisor Position Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous
Equipment:

Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1687
Logging Recorder Manuf.:

Equipment Room Details: 5 RACKS, 2 CABINETS,
Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: PLEASANT HILL PD
County: CONTRA COSTA
Surveyor: JKNOWLES
Survey Date: 9/15/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description 25 X 30, ALSO IS THE RESEPTION FOR PD DEPARTMENT Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type:

Equipment Grounding
Description:

Surge Suppression Devices:

Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: BEST POWER Model #: FE
# of Units: 1 kVA: Battery Capacity:

Condition and Comments:

Model #:

Channel Capacity: # of Channels Used:

Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1688
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 3 # of Call Taker Only Positions 4 # of Supervisor Positions:

Agencies Dispatched:
# of Spare Positions:

Notes:

Comments:

Fire Station Alerting Make Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: SPECTRA COM Model: GPS5283
Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type GOLD ELITE
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):

Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: MOTOROLA Model #:

Notes:

Racks:

Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 3
# of Positions 4
Notes:

Dispatch/Radio Position
Call Taker Position
Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
PHONE
CAD
RADIO
Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
Monitor CAD
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make:

CONFIDENTIAL
1689
# of Positions
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Supervisor Position Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous
Equipment:

Console Model #
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1690
Logging Recorder Manuf.: PYXIS
Equipment Room Details: 5 RACKS, 9 CABINETS, 10 X 40
Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: RICHMOND PD/FD
County: CONTRA COSTA
Surveyor: JKNOWLES
Survey Date: 9/17/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description 40 X 45, OPEN FLOOR PLAN
Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type: LINER
Equipment Grounding
Description:

EQUIPMENT GROUNDED TO UNDER RAISED FLOOR
Surge Suppression Devices:

Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: BEST POWER Model #: UNITY360
# of Units: 1 kVA: Battery Capacity:

Condition and Comments:

Model #: MAXPRO
Channel Capacity: 32 # of Channels Used: 12
Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1691
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 6 # of Call Taker Only Positions 2 # of Supervisor Positions:

Agencies Dispatched:
# of Spare Positions:

Notes:

Comments:

Fire Station Alerting Make ZETRON Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: SPECTRACOM Model: NETCLOCK/2
Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type MA/COM
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):
8 TRUNCKS
Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: MA/COM Model #:

Notes:

Racks:

Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 6
# of Positions 2
Notes:

Dispatch/Radio Position
Call Taker Position
Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
PHONE
cad
CAD
CAD
RADIO
Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
CAD
PHONE
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make:

CONFIDENTIAL
1692
# of Positions
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Supervisor Position Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous
Equipment:

Console Model #
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1693
Logging Recorder Manuf.: NICE
Equipment Room Details: 13 RACKS, NO OPEN RACKS,
Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: SAN RAMON VALLEY FIRE
County: CONTRA COSTA
Surveyor: JKNOWLES
Survey Date: 9/16/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description 25 X 30 ROOM DOES HAVE SPACE
Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type: LINEAR
Equipment Grounding
Description:

Surge Suppression Devices: NO
Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: LIBERT Model #: NFINITY
# of Units: 1 kVA: Battery Capacity:

Condition and Comments:

Model #:

Channel Capacity: # of Channels Used:

Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1694
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 3 # of Call Taker Only Positions # of Supervisor Positions: 1
Agencies Dispatched: SRVF
# of Spare Positions:

Notes:

Comments:

Fire Station Alerting Make Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: SPECTRACOM Model: NETCLOCK/GPS 9283
Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):

Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: MOTOROLA Model #:

Notes:

Racks:

Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 3
# of Positions
Notes:

Dispatch/Radio Position
Call Taker Position
Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
PHONE
CAD
CAD
CAD
RADIO
Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make:

CONFIDENTIAL
1695
# of Positions 1
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
PHONE
CAD
CAD
CAD
RADIO
Supervisor Position
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous FAX,
Equipment:

Console Model #
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1696
Logging Recorder Manuf.: DICTAPHONE
Equipment Room Details: 15 RACKS, 8 CABINETS
Raised Computer Flooring: Yes No
Center Name: WALNUT CREEK
County: CONTRA COSTA
Surveyor: JKNOWLES
Survey Date: 9/15/2008
Revisit:

Adequate Air Conditioning Yes No Model #:

Dispatch Room Description 19 X 25
Pwr. distribution Units: Yes No
Great Good Average Poor Grounding System: (Rate)
System Type: LINEAR
Equipment Grounding
Description:

Surge Suppression Devices:

Great Good Average Poor UPS System: (Rate)
Manufacturer: MITSUBISHI Model #: 2033A
# of Units: 1 kVA: Battery Capacity: 30
Condition and Comments:

Model #:

Channel Capacity: # of Channels Used:

Comments:

Site Type: DISPATCH

DISPATCH CENTER INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL
1697
# of Dispatch Only Positions: 6 # of Call Taker Only Positions # of Supervisor Positions:

Agencies Dispatched:
# of Spare Positions:

Notes:

Comments:

Fire Station Alerting Make Model:

Paging: Model:

Netclock: SPECTRACOM Model: NETCLOCK/GPS
Control Stations Location Qty
Mobile Data Equipment Make Model #:

Console Equip. Type
Incoming Circuits
(connectivity):

Central Electronics Equipment
Manufacturer: Model #:

Notes:

Racks:

Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
# of Positions 6
# of Positions
Notes:

Dispatch/Radio Position
Call Taker Position
Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
PHONE
CAD
CAD
CAD
RADIO
Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Console Make:

Console Model #
Console Make:

CONFIDENTIAL
1698
# of Positions
Computer Terminals and Moniters
Notes:

Monitors
Monitor 1
Monitor 2
Monitor 3
Monitor 4
Monitor 5
Control Station
Supervisor Position Application
Monitor
Mouse
Desktop
Headset
Footswitch
PBX/KTS Telephone Se
Notes:

Customer Premise
Equipment:

CAD: Yes No
Federal NCIC Yes No
Security Video Monitor Yes No
State Criminal Database Yes No
Alarm Yes No
Yes No System Manager
Notes:

Other Miscellanous
Equipment:

Console Model #
Console Make:

Console Model #

CONFIDENTIAL
1699
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

Appendix C
Surveyor Results

1700
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

1 Appendix C – Surveyor Results ............................................................................................................................................ 2 C.1 Survey Reported Radio Problems ......................................................................................................................... 2 C.2 Radio Problem Descriptions .................................................................................................................................. 2 C.3 EBRCS Radio System Requirements ................................................................................................................... 4 C.4 System Attribute Descriptions ............................................................................................................................... 5 C.5 Additional Survey Comments ................................................................................................................................ 8 C.6 Survey Questions .................................................................................................................................................. 8 Table C-1 Alameda County Trunked Radio Problems ......................................................................................... 32 Table C-2 Alameda County Conventional Radio Problems ................................................................................. 33 Table C-3 Contra Costa County Trunked Radio Problems .................................................................................. 34 Table C-4 Contra Costa County Conventional Radio Problems .......................................................................... 35 Table C-5 EBRCSA System Attribute Ranking .................................................................................................... 36 Table C-6 Alameda County 911 Dispatch Center ................................................................................................ 38 Table C-7 Alameda County Voice System ........................................................................................................... 39 Table C-8 Contra Costa 911 Dispatch Center ...................................................................................................... 41 Table C-9 Contra Costa County Voice System .................................................................................................... 42 1701
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

2 Appendix C – Surveyor Results
In order to identify current problems and the future radio system needs of Contra Costa and Alameda Counties, an online survey was used to obtain this critical information.

This appendix summarizes the results of the On-line Survey. Although the number of participants from each agency was not sufficient to make definitive statements, the trends reported in the online survey align with the information that was reported during group agency meetings and provide a snap shot of the existing problems with the aging radio systems in both counties. A list of the survey questions is provided in SECTION C.6.

C.1 Survey Reported Radio Problems
Alameda County and Contra Costa users, dispatchers and technical points of contact were asked to participate in an online survey that captured some information about their current communication systems. TABLES C-1 and C-2 summarize the problems for trunked and conventional radio systems for Alameda County. TABLES C-3 and C-4 summarize the problems for trunked and conventional for Contra Costa County. The tables indicate the level or seriousness of the perceived problems. Problems are listed in order of “overall” severity and are also ranked by discipline: fire, law enforcement, and all others.

C.2 Radio Problem Descriptions
The problem areas summarized in TABLES C-1 through C-4 are defined below. The headings listed below correspond to the “Problem” Column of Tables C-1 through C-4.

Two separate lists of problems are shown below, one for trunked radio systems and one for conventional radio systems. Although there are many similarities between the two lists, some of the problems are unique to each type of radio system.

Problem Descriptions for Trunked Radio Systems (Tables C-1 and C-3):

Capacity -- The system has insufficient capacity to support traffic associated with peak or emergency conditions.

Complex Operation -- The radio is complicated to operate or the radio user needs to know the characteristics of the system, which could cause difficulty if the user is in a high-pressure situation.

Dispatcher Access -- For whatever reason, the dispatcher or the user cannot gain access to each other on a routine basis. Either the user must compete for the dispatcher’s time, or the dispatcher has no way to contact the user.

Equipment Maintainability -- Maintenance is inadequate on user equipment (including consoles and desk top units); the user regularly needs to return to get the same thing fixed.

Indoor Portable Operation -- Portable units cannot reliably be used in the system, particularly indoors.

Interference -- Users from your own or other localities interfere and step on the local users. This either overrides critical communications or forces messages to be repeated.
1702
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

3 Interoperability -- The system does not allow users the ability to communicate between agencies within the jurisdiction.

Limited Coverage -- Dead spots regularly occur, particularly between dispatcher and user.

Outdoor Portable Operation -- Portable units cannot reliably be used in the system, particularly outdoors.

Regional Interoperability -- The system does not allow users the ability to communicate between agencies outside of the jurisdiction.

System Busies – The user has to wait to gain access to the radio system, not because someone is using the talkgroup, but because a channel is not available.

System Reliability -- There are frequent breakdowns of old or poorly maintained infrastructure equipment.

Talk Group Congestion -- On your radio system, too much unrelated chatter from other users is heard; user tends to turn volume down unless they specifically need to call someone, and thus cannot be reached.

Problem Descriptions for Conventional Radio Systems (Tables C-2 and C-4):

Capacity -- The system has insufficient capacity to support traffic associated with peak or emergency conditions.

Channel Congestion -- Too many unrelated functions using the channel; user tends to turn volume down unless they specifically need to call someone, and thus cannot be reached.

Channel Unavailable -- Too many users on the channel; user cannot gain access when the situation requires communications with other units or with the dispatcher.

Complex Operation -- The radio is complicated to operate or the radio user needs to know the characteristics of the system, which could cause difficulty if the user is in a high-pressure situation.

Dispatcher Access -- For whatever reason, the dispatcher or the user cannot gain access to each other on a routine basis. Either the user must compete for the dispatcher’s time, or the dispatcher has no way to contact the user.

Equipment Maintainability -- Maintenance is inadequate on user equipment (including consoles and desk top units); the user regularly needs to return to get the same thing fixed.

Indoor Portable Operation -- Portable units cannot reliably be used in the system, particularly indoors.

Interference -- Users from your own or other localities interfere and step on the local users. This either overrides critical communications or forces messages to be repeated.

Interoperability -- The system does not allow users the ability to communicate between agencies within the jurisdiction.

Limited Coverage -- Dead spots regularly occur, particularly between dispatcher and user.
1703
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

4 Mobile to Mobile -- Users cannot talk between mobile units more than a short distance.

Outdoor Portable Operation -- Portable units cannot reliably be used in the system, particularly outdoors.

Regional Interoperability -- The system does not allow users the ability to communicate between agencies outside of the jurisdiction.

System Reliability -- There are frequent breakdowns of old or poorly maintained infrastructure equipment.

Rating Scale:
0 - No problem identified.
1 - Identified problem, currently not of concern. May become a concern in the future. 2 - Occasionally a problem which affects some operations but is generally worked around.
3 - Regularly a problem, operations are routinely affected to the extent there is a loss of operational efficiency.
4 - Frequently a problem, frequently affects operations, compromises the ability of the user to fulfill his mission.
5 - Critical concern, usually affects operations, potential compromise to safety of user or of citizen.

C.3 EBRCS Radio System Requirements
Alameda and Contra Costa County member agency users, dispatchers and technical points of contact were asked to participate in an online survey that captured their needs in the new radio system. These results are shown in TABLE C-5. Needs are listed in order of “overall” importance and are also ranked by discipline: fire, law enforcement, and all others.

The online survey results indicate that users are very concerned with the following attributes in a new radio system:
 Power Backup
 Reliability/Failure Hierarchy
 Survivability
 Single Points of Failure
 Improved Voice Radio Coverage
 In-Building Coverage
 Staffing and Training
 Minimize Interference
 Emergency Alerting
 Operational Boundary Transparency
 Future Expansion
 Owner-Controlled Connectivity Network
 Interoperability with Adjacent Localities
 Recorder Operations
1704
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

5  Microwave Additional Capacity
 Centralized Maintenance
 Regional Connectivity
C.4 System Attribute Descriptions
The attributes summarized in TABLE C-5 are defined below. The headings listed below correspond to the “Ref” Column in Tables C-5.

Reference Column Descriptions:
a. Improved Voice Radio Coverage: The system shall provide a signal availability of 95 percent to/from mobile radios, with coverage evenly distributed over the service area for all operational functions.
b. In-Building Coverage: The system shall provide a signal availability of 95 percent to/from portables in building.
c. Minimize Interference: The system should minimize or eliminate interference. d. Increased Channel Capacity: The system design shall include additional channels for current and future capacity. Additional channels are important to alleviate congestion on the dispatch and incident channels. e. On-Scene Fireground/Tactical Communications Channels: Direct radio-toradio frequencies (firegrounds) enable local incident communications inbuilding, below grade, and in other situations where repeated channels do not offer solid coverage.
f. Monitored Firegrounds: Fireground communications must be available to be monitored by dispatch, command personnel, or recording. g. Emergency Alerting: The radios and system shall provide an emergency function for alerting dispatch and supervisors to the need for assistance. h. Workgroup Oriented Operation: The system shall be organized with sufficient channels or talk-groups to allow departmental workgroups to have their own channel or talk group.
i. Voice Security: The system shall provide encrypted communications for users that need to prevent unauthorized interception of sensitive information. j. Operational Boundary Transparency: System operation will be logical, with the focus on whom the user wants to call rather than where they are located.

Changes in the user agencies' operational boundaries shall be transparent to radio users. The radio system shall allow any group or department to operate with full communications capability within the service area. k. One System Serves All Agencies: Convenient, same-radio communications is important between all Public Safety agencies within the locality. l. Interoperability through Dispatch: The radio system shall provide a connection between all dispatch operations allowing dispatchers to facilitate information flow between agencies through dispatch and incident command, rather than at the user level.
m. Interoperability with Adjacent Localities: The radio system design shall emphasize compatibility with radio systems in the adjacent localities to enable 1705
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

6 public safety users to assist in adjacent counties (and vice versa) and communicate with users from other Public Safety agencies using their assigned radios.
n. Interoperability with State Agencies: The radio system design should emphasize compatibility with radio systems in use by the State to facilitate communications with State agencies.
o. Interoperability with Federal Agencies: While local agencies cannot operate radio on Federal channels, compatible equipment would facilitate Federal/local cooperative efforts if Federal users could communicate over the locality infrastructure.
p. Person Location: Dispatch can determine the location of a user (to his portable or mobile radio), useful for example when sending assistance. q. System Control: The Locality is significantly more comfortable with the high level of system control that comes with exclusive use and system ownership. r. Text Messaging: The mobiles and portable radios shall be capable of text messaging.
s. Dual Band Operation: The user radios need to operate on VHF and 700 / 800 MHz.
t. Recorder Operations: Logged audio is important for all dispatch and incident communications.
u. Vehicle Location: Automatic vehicle location (AVL) shall allow vehicles to be located by dispatch.
v. Future Expansion: The system shall be capable of future expansion in the number of channels and the number of users. System design shall incorporate expansion to the level of usage predicted for the next 15 years with only the addition of equipment.
w. Owner-Controlled Connectivity Network: The system shall be interconnected using a dedicated interconnecting backbone network, such as microwave or fiber. The goal is to maximize reliability, minimize use of leased carriers and associated costs, and maintain control of the network. Additionally, a dedicated, highly reliable network interconnecting all major radio locations is highly desired. This can be via microwave or fiber.
x. Microwave Additional Capacity: The network design shall include extra capacity, over and above the radio and mobile data needs, for other Locality uses.
y. Regional Connectivity: The system design shall provide infrastructure connectivity to adjacent areas.
z. OTAP: The system shall provide for Over-the-Air-Programming of radios. aa. OTAR: The system shall provide for Over-the-Air-Rekeying of encrypted radios. bb. Over-the-Air-Reflash: The system shall provide for over-the-air upgrades to operating software or new software versions for mobiles and portables. 1706
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

7 cc. Survivability: The system shall be designed to survive in severe weather or emergency conditions. If dispatch points are shifted from their primary to a backup location, radio control shall be available at the backup location to the same degree it was available at primary dispatch.
dd. Reliability/Failure Hierarchy: The radio system and equipment must be designed such that single-mode failures do not perceptibly impact the routine operations of the system.

The following requirements shall apply to failure conditions:
 Channel failure: no operating impact due to failed voice channel.  Site failure: no operating impact except reduced coverage area.  Primary power failure: UPS backup shall be supplied for all communications equipment, and generator backup for the radio equipment.  Console failures: Single console failure: use reserve console. Console common equipment failure: dispatchers operate co-located radio control station.
 Communications Center failure: Dispatch using radio control stations at a backup dispatch center.
ee. Single Points of Failure: The system shall, as much as practical, minimize single points of failure. This is accomplished through redundant equipment, multi-node network design, distributed processing, backup equipment, etc. ff. Power Backup: All fixed radio equipment shall require backup power with automatic transfer, capable of handling 100 percent loading of radio equipment.

An uninterruptible power system (UPS) shall be required for all communications equipment.
gg. Staffing and Training: The system vendor shall provide formal training for system administrators, supervisors, dispatchers, radio users, and maintenance technicians.
hh. Centralized Maintenance: The Locality / Agency prefers to centrally maintain and administer the radio system, dispatch systems, and user radios, either inhouse or using a service shop. Centralized maintenance provides consistent and coordinated services for all user departments.
ii. Competitive Procurement Process: The overall system concept shall be available from more than one vendor allowing a competitive procurement process. Equipment shall be procured using open non-restrictive, competitive specifications. Award to be based on the most cost-effective system meeting the specified operational and functional requirements.
jj. Commonality of Equipment: A single vendor shall install and supply all required equipment; as much as possible, user equipment shall be similar in operation and maintenance requirements. The goal is to minimize spare parts inventory and multiple vendor training requirements.
kk. Multiple Sources: Compatible user equipment shall be available from multiple vendors. Competitive procurement of user equipment is more important than equipment commonality.
ll. Phased Implementation: As much as possible, system procurement and implementation shall occur on a phased basis, allowing costs to be spread over several years. The radio system shall be designed to add user groups to the system over time.
1707
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

8 mm. Tiered Subscriber Cost: High-, mid-, and low-tier radio equipment with feature sets and costs matched to the user group shall be provided.

Users ranked the attributes utilizing the following scale:

Rating Scale:

0. Attribute is NOT IMPORTANT to the user.

1. Attribute is MINIMALLY IMPORTANT to the user.

2. Attribute is NICE TO HAVE, could enhance operations.

3. Attribute is USEFUL, will promote more efficient day to day operation.

4. QUITE IMPORTANT, lack could result in degradation of mission, injury, or loss of property.

5. CRITICAL, lack generally will result in injury, loss of property, or degradation of mission.

C.5 Additional Survey Comments
The survey respondents were given the opportunity to provide additional comments in a free form text format. These comments are provided in their unedited form in TABLES C-6 through C-9.

C.6 Survey Questions
This section presents the CTA Surveyor questions used for the EBRCSA survey. Each section contains a group of related questions, such as Current Trunked Radio System Assessment or Current Conventional Radio System Assessment.

User Information - Initial Questions
Note: These questions gather information about the survey participant. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is your radio system Trunked or Conventional?
Trunked
Conventional
Your radio system is trunked if you use talk groups. Trunked systems are typically at 700, 800 or 900 MHz. Your radio system is conventional if you use channels or frequencies. Conventional radio systems are typically at high band, VHF or UHF frequencies.

Are you a manager or administrator of the radio system? Yes
No
You manage or administer the radio system.
1708
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

9 Do you use or carry a Pager in your work?
Yes
No
You carry a pager, or you send out pages over a paging system as a part of your work.

Do you use Mobile Data in your work (laptop or mobile data computer in your vehicle connected to the radio or via an "air card")?
Yes
No
Answer "Yes" if you use mobile data.

Do you have Mobile Data on your system?
Yes
No
Answer "Yes" if you use mobile data.

Are you a Dispatcher?
Yes
No
Are you a Supervisor?
Yes
No
Do you have mobile data on your system; that is, a laptop or mobile data computer in the vehicle either connected to the radio or via an "air card"? Current Conventional Voice Radio System
Assessment
This section will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Conventional” to the question “Is your radio system Trunked or Conventional? Rating Scale and Problem Descriptions are shown in Section C-2:

Current Trunked Voice Radio System Assessment
This section will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Trunked” to the question “Is your radio system Trunked or Conventional? ______________________________________________________________ Rating Scale and Problem Descriptions are shown in Section C-2:

Paging System
This section and the Current Paging System Assessment section will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Yes” to the question “Do you use a pager in your work?”

What Type of Paging System Do You Use?
1709
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

10 Tone and Voice Pager
Digital pager
Other
Current Paging System Assessment
Rating Scale:

0. No problem identified.

1. Identified problem, currently not of concern. May become a concern in the future.

2. Occasionally a problem which affects some operations but is generally worked around.

3. Regularly a problem, operations are routinely affected to the extent there is a loss of operational efficiency.

4. Frequently a problem, frequently affects operations, compromises the ability of the user to fulfill his mission.

5. Critical concern, usually affects operations, potential compromise to safety of user or of citizen.

6. Don’t Know, insufficient information available to answer this question.

Limited Coverage: With your current paging system, do you experience dead spots or have limited coverage?
Limited Coverage -- Dead spots regularly occur; can’t receive a page.

Indoor Pager Operation: Do you receive your pages reliably, particularly indoors? Indoor Pager Operation -- Pagers cannot generally and reliably be used in the system, particularly indoors.

Interference: If you have a tone & voice pager, do pages from another locality cause interference? (If you have a digital pager, please leave blank or answer "Don't Know").

Interference – Pages from other locations are heard and interfere, creating interference.

System Reliability: How reliable is your paging system? Reliability -- Frequent breakdowns of old or poorly maintained equipment, generally infrastructure equipment.

Equipment Maintainability: Is maintenance on your pager adequate, or do you regularly need to get the same thing fixed?
Equipment Maintainability -- Maintenance is inadequate on paging (user) equipment; the user regularly needs to return to get the same thing fixed.

Mobile Data
The Mobile Data sections will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Yes” to the question “Do you use mobile data in your work?”

Mobile Data Information
Current Mobile Data Operations
Do you use mobile data on a radio system, a commercial (cellular) data service provider or both?
Your radio system may provide the ability to have mobile data. Mobile data may be provided by a commercial data services provider or cellular provider via an "air card." Radio System
Commercial Data Service Provider
1710
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

11 Both
If your mobile data is on a radio system, what is the frequency band? Low Band
VHF
UHF
700 MHz
800 MHz
900 MHz
Other
What Type of Mobile Data Equipment Do You Use?
Laptops
Mobile Data Computers or Terminals
Other
If you selected "Other," please describe.

Mobile Data Applications
Does your mobile data system support GPS or Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL)? Does your mobile data system support sending fingerprints? Does your mobile data system support sending maps or geo-files? Does your mobile data system support sending images?
Does your mobile data system support video?

Current Mobile Data Assessment
Rating Scale:

0. No problem identified.

1. Identified problem, currently not of concern. May become a concern in the future.

2. Occasionally a problem which affects some operations but is generally worked around.

3. Regularly a problem, operations are routinely affected to the extent there is a loss of operational efficiency.

4. Frequently a problem, frequently affects operations, compromises the ability of the user to fulfill his mission.

5. Critical concern, usually affects operations, potential compromise to safety of user or of citizen.

6. Don’t Know, insufficient information available to answer this question.

Limited Data Coverage: When you use mobile data, do you experience areas of limited data coverage?
Limited Data Coverage Area -- Dead spots regularly occur,

Access: Can you gain access to the mobile data system when you need to? Access -- User cannot gain access when the situation requires data communications.

Capacity: Does the system have sufficient capacity to support mobile data during peak or emergency conditions?
Capacity -- The system has insufficient capacity to support traffic associated with peak or emergency conditions.
1711
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

12 System Reliability: Are there frequent problems; does the equipment breakdown? System Reliability -- Frequent breakdowns of old or poorly maintained equipment, including infrastructure equipment.

Complex Operation: How easy is it to operate the laptop, MDC or the mobile data application?
Complex Operation -- The mobile data application is complicated to use, which could cause difficulty if the user is in a high-pressure situation.

Dispatcher Access: Can you gain access to the dispatcher via the mobile data system?
Dispatcher Access -- For whatever reason, the dispatcher or the user cannot gain access to each other via the data system on a routine basis.

Equipment Maintainability: Is maintenance on your laptop or MDC adequate, or do you regularly need to get the same thing fixed?
Equipment Maintainability -- Maintenance is inadequate on user equipment; the user regularly needs to return to get the same thing fixed.

Data Speed: Does it take a long time to send or receive a message? Data Speed—It takes a long time to send and / or receive a message, or the message has to be resent.

Current Dispatch Center - Assessment
The Dispatch Center section will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Dispatcher” to the question “Are you a Radio User or a Dispatcher?” Rating Scale:

0. No problem identified.

1. Identified problem, currently not of concern. May become a concern in the future.

2. Occasionally a problem which affects some operations but is generally worked around.

3. Regularly a problem, operations are routinely affected to the extent there is a loss of operational efficiency.

4. Frequently a problem, frequently affects operations, compromises the ability of the user to fulfill his mission.

5. Critical concern, usually affects operations, potential compromise to safety of user or of citizen.

6. Don’t Know, insufficient information available to answer this question.

Complex Operation: How difficult is it to operate your radio console on the system? Complex Operation – The radio console is complicated to operate. This could cause difficulty in a high-pressure situation.

Paging Operation: If you send out pages, how cumbersome or difficult is it to send out a page on the system?
Complex Operation – The paging system is complicated to operate, which could cause difficulty in a high-pressure situation.

Dispatch Center Size: Does your dispatch center have sufficient space to comfortably house all necessary personnel for the current dispatch operation as well as space for expected growth?
Dispatch Center Size –The dispatch center has sufficient space to comfortably house the dispatchers, call-takers, management and supervision, and technical support for the current dispatch operation as well as space for expected growth. 1712
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

13 Equipment Area Size: Does your dispatch center have sufficient space to comfortably house the equipment used to support the current dispatch operation as well as space for expected growth?
Equipment Area Size - The dispatch center has sufficient space to comfortably house the equipment used to support the current dispatch operation as well as space for expected growth. There is sufficient space for consoles, radios, telephones, and computers.

Expansion Capacity: Does your dispatch center have sufficient unused space to expand both the dispatching area and equipment space?
Radio Console System: Does the console system adequately interface with and support the radio system and is it easy to operate?
Radio Console System - The Console system adequately interfaces with and supports the radio system. Dispatchers easily operate the console system features. All controls and information readouts shall be clear and easily understood. The system supports headsets, foot controls, select and unselect audio, and other modern features.

CAD System: Does the CAD system adequately interface and support the records management system and is it easy to operate?
CAD System - The CAD system adequately interfaces and supports the records management system. The dispatchers easily operate the system features. All controls and information readouts are clear and easily understood. The technology makes the dispatch and call taking easier not more difficult. The system aids the dispatcher and call takers in answering calls, event locations, unit selection, report and incident numbering, and associative needs. Systems shall be designed for single entry and automation when possible to reduce work activities.

CPE System: Does the 911 telephone system (CPE) operate easily and seamlessly for all in-coming 911 calls and out-going transfers?
CPE System - The 911 telephone system (CPE) operates seamlessly all in-coming 911 calls and out-going transfers. All controls and information shall be easy to read and understandable. The system requires few buttons pushes in operations. PBX/Admin Telephones - The PBX telephone system operates seamlessly all in-coming administrative calls and all out-going telephone lines. All controls and information are easy to read and understandable. The system requires few buttons pushes in operations.

PBX/Admin Telephones: Does the PBX telephone system operate easily and seamlessly handles all in-coming administrative calls and all out-going telephone lines? PBX/Admin Telephones - The PBX telephone system operates seamlessly. All incoming administrative calls and all out-going telephone lines. All controls and information are easy to read and understandable. The system requires few buttons pushes in operations.

Furniture: Is the furniture a full featured design that allows raising and lowering the work positions, tilting work surfaces and management of the required cables and power cords?
Furniture - The furniture is a full featured design. The design allows raising and lowering the work positions, tilting work surfaces, management of the required cables and power cords. The design of the furniture assists the dispatcher and call takers with a convenient and comfortable layout.

Lighting: Is the dispatch center lighted in such a manner as to improve the operating environment, including individual controlled task lighting, natural light and/or windows, and in-direct lighting?
1713
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

14 HVAC: Does the dispatch center have an effective heat and air conditioning system that provides for a wide range of temperature conditions, as well as provide for sufficient air movement?
HVAC - The dispatch center has an effective heat and air conditioning system that provides for a wide range of conditions, from chilly nights to hot days. Humidity is controlled. There is sufficient movement of air and infusion of fresh air to allow the dispatch area to have a non-stuffy atmosphere.

Reliability: Are the systems that support the dispatch operation reliable? Reliability - The systems that support the dispatch operation shall be reliable. Failures shall be far between and the dispatcher shall have a sense of confidence that the systems will be running when needed.

Back-Up Provisions: Is there an alternative dispatch center that is capable, when staffed, of performing the emergency functions performed at the primary center? Back-Up Provisions – An alternative dispatch center is maintained that is capable, when staffed, of performing the emergency functions performed at the primary center. The alternate center is separated sufficiently from the primary center to ensure the survivability of the alternate center.

Maintainability: When a system or device fails are the repairs quickly begun and performed?
Maintainability - In the rare occasions when a system or device fails the repairs are quickly begun and performed. Overall there is a high confidence level that the system will be kept running.

Parking: Is there an easily accessible, well-lighted and secure parking facility? Parking - The Dispatch center has easy outside parking access with mass transit and traffic access. The parking lot shall be well lighted and secure.

Internal Facilities: Does the dispatch center have adequate break areas, restrooms, and quiet rooms?
Internal Facilities - The dispatch center is designed with adequate break areas, restrooms, and quiet rooms. The restrooms are located near to but not in the dispatch area. There are un-recorded telephones for personal use.

Security: Is there controlled access to the Dispatch Center using locked doors and closed circuit cameras for entrance controls?
Security - The Dispatch center is designed with controlled access to the Center using locked doors and closed circuit cameras for entrance controls. The exterior of the facility is well lighted and secure.

Dispatch Center Condition: Is the Dispatch Center neat, clean and organized? Equipment Area Condition: The equipment area is neat and clean; the equipment is installed in a professional manner.

Radio Equipment – Current Quantities
The Radio Equipment sections will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Yes” to the question “Are you a manager or administrator of the radio system?” Current Radios in Operation (Not Including Spares)
For each equipment category, enter the total number of units you operate (not including spares) for each frequency band.
1714
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

15 Equipment
Type
Low Band VHF UHF Dual Band
700 / 800 MHz
800 MHz 900 MHz
Mobiles
Portables
Desktop or
Control
Stations

Min: 0
Max: 9999
Current Spare Radios in Inventory
For each equipment category, enter the total number of spare units you have in inventory for each frequency band.

Equipment
Type
Low Band VHF UHF Dual Band
700 / 800 MHz
800 MHz 900 MHz
Mobiles
Portables
Desktop or
Control
Stations

Min: 0
Max: 9999
Mobile Data Equipment – Quantities
The Mobiles Data Equipment sections will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Yes” to the questions “Are you a manager or administrator of the radio system?” and “Do you have Mobile Data on your system?
Current Equipment in Operation (Not Including Spares)
Please enter the number of current laptops or MDCs you have in operation (not including spares).

Min: 0
Max: 9999
Current Spare Equipment in Inventory
Please enter the number of spare laptops or MDCs
you have in inventory.

Min: 0
Max: 9999
Immediate Needs
Are the radio equipment quantities you entered in the previous section sufficient for your current staffing needs?
1715
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

16 Immediate Radio Equipment Needs
This section will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Yes” to the previous question.

For each equipment category, enter the total number of units you need today for each frequency band.

Equipment
Type
Low Band VHF UHF Dual Band
700 / 800 MHz
800 MHz 900 MHz
Mobiles
Spare Mobiles
Portables
Spare
Portables

Desktop or
Control
Stations
Spare Desktop
or Control
Stations

Min: 0
Max: 9999
Additional Mobile Data Needs
Additional Laptops or MDCs: Please enter the number of additional laptops or MDCs you need today but do not have (not including spares).

Additional Spare Laptops or MDCs: Please enter the number of additional laptops or MDCs you need in inventory but do not have today.

Min: 0
Max: 9999
Radio Equipment – Forecasted Quantities

Enter the percentage increase in the quantities of user equipment estimated to be needed 5, 10 and 15 years from now. For example, if you currently have 500 mobiles, 300 portables, and 20 desktop stations, and you enter 10 (percent), this means you would need 50 more mobiles, 30 more portables, and 2 more Desktop stations in 5 years. This is a rough estimate, and so will be applied across each radio type (mobiles, portables, control stations). Note that the range is 0% to 1000%, allowing for no increase to up to 10 times as many radios as currently in place. It would be unusual for increases over 50%, unless you are expecting significant growth, or planning consolidation with other Agencies on a shared system, for example
5 Years 10 Years 15 Years
What percentage
increase in
equipment do you
forecast for 5, 10,
and 15 years out?

1716
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

17 Interoperability Continuum – Governance
The Interoperability sections will only be presented if the survey participant answers “Yes” to the question “Are you a manager or administrator of the radio system?” ______________________________________________________________________ SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum - Governance
Governance
A common governing structure for solving interoperability issues will improve the policies, processes, and procedures of any major project by enhancing communication, coordination, and cooperation, establishing guidelines and principles, and reducing any internal jurisdictional conflicts. This group should consist of local, tribal, state, and federal entities as well as representatives from all pertinent public safety disciplines within the identified region. A formal governance structure is critical to the success of interoperability planning.

Rating Scale
1- Individual Agencies Working Independently
2- Informal Coordination Between Agencies
3- Key Multi-Discipline Staff Collaboration on a Regular Basis 4- Regional Committee Working with a Statewide Communications Interoperability Plan Framework
5- Don't Know
Please select the response that best describes your interoperability governance structure with other disciplines within your own jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes your interoperability governance structure with other agencies outside your jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes your interoperability governance structure between state and local government.

Please select the response that best describes your interoperability governance structure between federal and local government.

Interoperability Continuum – Standard Operating
Procedures
SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum - Standard Operating Procedures

Standard Operating Procedures
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are formal written guidelines or instructions for incident response. SOPs typically have both operational and technical components.

Established SOPs enable emergency responders to sucessfully coordinate an incident response across disciplines and jurisdictions. Clear and effective SOPs are essential in the development and deployment of any interoperable communications system.

Rating Scale
1- Individual Agency SOPs
2- Joint SOPs for Planned Events
3- Joint SOPs for Emergencies
4- Regional Set of Communications SOPs
1717
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

18 5- National Incident Management (NIMS) Integrated SOPs 6- Don't Know
Please select the response that best describes your Standard Operating Procedures for interoperability with other disciplines within your own jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes your Standard Operating Procedures for interoperability with agencies outside your jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes your Standard Operating Procedures for interoperability between state and local government.

Please select the response that best describes your Standard Operating Procedures for interoperability between federal and local government.

Interoperability Continuum – Technology - Voice
SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum – Technology - Voice

Technology
Although technology is a critical tool for improving Interoperability, it is not the sole driver of an optimal solution. Success in each of the other elements is essential to its proper use an implementation, and should drive technology procurement. Technology is highly dependent upon existing infrastructure within a region. Multiple technology solutions may be required to support large events.

Rating Scale
1- Swap Radios
2- Gateway
3- Shared Channels
4- Proprietary Shared Systems
5- Standards-based Shared Systems
6- Don't Know
Please select the response that best describes the technology or your means of interoperability with other disciplines within your own jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes the technology or your means of interoperability with other agencies outside your own jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes the technology or your means of interoperability between state and local government.

Please select the response that best describes your interoperability governance structure between federal and local government.

Interoperability Continuum – Technology – Data
SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum – Technology Data

Technology
Although technology is a critical tool for improving Interoperability, it is not the sole driver of an optimal solution. Success in each of the other elements is essential to its proper use an implementation, and should drive technology procurement. Technology is highly dependent upon existing infrastructure within a region. Multiple technology solutions may be required to support large events.
1718
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

19 Rating Scale
1- Swap Files
2- Common Applications
3- Custom-Interfaced Applications
4- One-Way Standards-based Sharing
5- Two-Way Standards-based Sharing
6- Don't Know
Please select the response that best describes the technology or your means of data interoperability with other disciplines within your own jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes the technology or your means of data interoperability with other agencies outside your own jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes the technology or your means of data interoperability between state and local government.

Please select the response that best describes the technology or your means of data interoperability between federal and local government.

Interoperability Continuum – Training and Exercises
SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum - Training & Exercises

Training & Exercises
Proper training and regular exercises are critical to the implementation and maintenance of a successful interoperability solution. Implementing effective training and exercise programs to practice communications interoperability is essential for ensuring that the technology works and responders are able to effectively communicate during emergencies.

Rating Scale
1- General Orientation on Equipment
2- Single Agency Tabletop Exercises for Key Field and Support Staff 3- Multi-agency Tabletop Exercises for Key Field and Support Staff 4- Multi-agency Full Functional Exercises Involving All Staff 5- Regular Comprehensive Regional Training and Exercises 6- Don't Know
Please select the response that best describes your interoperability training and exercises with other disciplines within your own jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes your training and exercises for interoperability with agencies outside of jurisdiction.

Please select the response that best describes your training and exercises for interoperability between state and local government.

Please select the response that best describes your training and exercises for interoperability between federal and local government.
1719
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

20 Interoperability Continuum – Usage
SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum – Usage
Usage
Usage refers to how often interoperable communications technologies are used.

Success in this element is contingent upon progress and interplay among the other four elements on the Interoperability Continuum.

Rating Scale
1- Planned Events
2- Localized Emergency Incidents
3- Regional Incident Management
4- Daily Use Throughout Region
5- Don't Know
Please select the response that best describes how often you use interoperability with other disciplines within your own jurisdiction or locality.

Please select the response that best describes how often you use interoperability with other agencies outside your jurisdiction.

Please select the response that best describes how often you use interoperability between state and local government.

Please select the response that best describes how often you use interoperability between federal and local government.

Voice Interoperability Assessment
In this Voice Interoperability Assessment section, you will be asked to describe how your interoperability, using voice radio, with other Agencies. There are four groups of questions - interoperable communications within your jurisdiction, between jurisdictions, with State agencies, and with Federal agencies.

Please answer all questions to the best of your ability.

Clicking on any Question will provide "Help" in this screen. Click in the response field to the right of the Question to provide your response.

You can change any response.

Current Interoperability
The section asks who you have interoperability with currently, within your jurisdiction or locality, outside your jurisdiction or locality, with state agencies and with federal agencies.

What disciplines within your jurisdiction do you currently have interoperability with?
Select all that apply – Disciplines within your jurisdiction that your Agency currently has interoperability with. If you do not have interoperability with any other disciplines, check "None".

Law Enforcement - Sheriff
Law Enforcement - Police
1720
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

21 Law Enforcement - Tribal
Fire
EMS
Emergency Management
Hospitals
Correctional Facilities
Local Public Works
Other Local Government
Other Tribal Government
Other
None

What disciplines outside your jurisdiction do you currently have interoperability with?
Select all that apply – Disciplines outside your jurisdiction that your Agency currently has interoperability with. If you do not have interoperability with any other disciplines, check "None".

Law Enforcement - Sheriff
Law Enforcement - Police
Law Enforcement - Tribal
Fire
EMS
Emergency Management
Hospitals
Correctional Facilities
Local Public Works
Other Local Government
Other Tribal Government
Other
None
What State Agencies are you currently able to communicate with? (List must be customized for applicable state)
Select all that apply - State Agencies that your Agency communicates with. If you do not communicate with any State Agencies, check "None".

State Police
Fish and Game
Homeland Security
Dept. of Agriculture
Dept. of Commerce
Corrections
Health
Emergency Management
Human Services
Information Technologies
National Guard
Transportation Dept.

Other
None
What Federal Agencies are you currently able to communicate with? Select all that apply - Federal Agencies that your agency communicates with. If you do not communicate with any Federal Agencies, check "None".

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
Bureau of Land Management
1721
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

22 Drug Enforcement Administration
Dept of Interior
Dept of Homeland Security
Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Bureau of Investigation
National Parks Service
Natural Resource Conservation Service
Secret Service
Transportation Security Agency
US Dept of Agriculture
US Forest Service
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Marshals
US Postal Service
Other
None
If you selected “Other” for having interoperability with any local, state or federal disciplines or agencies, please enter the agencies here.

List the specific disciplines that you have interoperability with that are not listed above.

Need Interoperability
What disciplines in your jurisdiction do you need to communicate with, but cannot?
Select all that apply – Disciplines that your Agency is not currently able to interoperate with. If you do not communicate with any other disciplines, check "None".

Law Enforcement - Sheriff
Law Enforcement - Police
Law Enforcement - Tribal
Fire
EMS
Emergency Management
Hospitals
Correctional Facilities
Local Public Works
Other Local Government
Other Tribal Government
Other
None

What disciplines outside of your jurisdiction do you need to communicate with, but cannot?
Select all that apply – Disciplines that your Agency is not currently able to interoperate with. If you do not communicate with any other disciplines, check "None".

Law Enforcement - Sheriff
Law Enforcement - Police
Law Enforcement - Tribal
Fire
EMS
Emergency Management
Hospitals
Correctional Facilities
Local Public Works
Other Local Government
Other Tribal Government
Other
1722
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

23 None
What State Agencies or disciplines do you need to communicate with, but cannot? (List must be customized for applicable state)
Select all that apply - State Agencies that your Agency is not currently able to interoperate with. If you do not communicate with any other disciplines, check "None".

State Police
Fish and Game
Homeland Security
Dept. of Agriculture
Dept. of Commerce
Corrections
Health
Emergency Management
Human Services
Information Technologies
National Guard
Transportation Dept.

Other
None
What Federal Agencies or disciplines do you need to communicate with, but cannot? (List must be customized for applicable state)
Select all that apply – Federal Agencies that your Agency is not currently able to interoperate with. If you do not communicate with any other disciplines, check "None".

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
Bureau of Land Management
Drug Enforcement Administration
Dept of Interior
Dept of Homeland Security
Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Bureau of Investigation
National Parks Service
Natural Resource Conservation Service
Secret Service
Transportation Security Agency
US Dept of Agriculture
US Forest Service
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Marshals
US Postal Service
Other
None
If you selected "Other" for needing interoperability with any local, state or federal disciplines or agencies, please enter the agencies here.

List the specific Agencies that you communicate with (interoperations) that have not been selected above.

Interoperability Methods
What Methods Do You Use for Communications or Interoperability with Other Agencies Within Your Jurisdiction?
Select the Methods you use for Communications with other Agencies within your Jurisdiction. Please read the Drop-Down list items carefully before making your 1723
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

24 selection. A “shared radio system” is where multiple agencies share a common frequency band and agree on common channels.

Radio on a Shared System
Shared Frequency or Channel
Portable Radio Cache
Second Radio or Radio Swap
Local Mutual Aid Channel
Government Mutual Aid
State Fire Aid
Law Enforcement Assistance Channel
Gateway or Bridge
Console Patch
Hard Patch (e.g. through a Control Station)
Dispatch has Desktop or Control Station
Shared Database
Cell phone or Nextel
Indirect via Land Line
Indirect via Runner
Other
None
What Methods Do You Use for Communications or Interoperability with Other Agencies Outside Your Jurisdiction or Locality?
Select the Methods you use for Communications with other Agencies with other Jurisdictions. Please read the Drop-Down list items carefully before making your selection. A “shared radio system” is where multiple agencies share a common frequency band and agree on common channels.

Radio on a Shared System
Shared Frequency or Channel
Portable Radio Cache
Second Radio or Radio Swap
Local Mutual Aid Channel
Government Mutual Aid
State Fire Aid
Law Enforcement Assistance Channel
Gateway or Bridge
Console Patch
Hard Patch (e.g. through a Control Station)
Dispatch has Desktop or Control Station
Shared Database
Cell phone or Nextel
Indirect via Land Line
Indirect via Runner
Other
None
What Methods Do You Use for Communications or Interoperability with State Agencies?
Select the Methods you use for Communications with State Agencies. Please read the Drop-Down list items carefully before making your selection. A “shared radio system” is where multiple agencies share a common frequency band and agree on common channels.

Radio on a Shared System
Local Mutual Aid Channel
Government Mutual Aid
State Fire Aid
1724
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

25 Portable Radio Cache
Second Radio or Radio Swap
Law Enforcement Assistance Channel
Gateway or Bridge
Console Patch
Hard Patch (e.g. through a Control Station)
Dispatch has Desktop or Control Station
Shared Database
Cell phone or Nextel
Indirect via Land Line
Indirect via Runner
Other
None
What Methods Do You Use for Communications or Interoperability with Federal Agencies?
Select the Methods you use for Communication with Federal Agencies. Please read the Drop-Down list items carefully before making your selection. A “shared radio system” is where multiple agencies share a common frequency band and agree on common channels.

Radio on a Shared System
Local Mutual Aid Channel
Government Mutual Aid
State Fire Aid
Portable Radio Cache
Second Radio or Radio Swap
Law Enforcement Assistance Channel
Gateway or Bridge
Console Patch
Hard Patch (e.g. through a Control Station)
Dispatch has Desktop or Control Station
Shared Database
Cell phone or Nextel
Indirect via Land Line
Indirect via Runner
Other
None

If "Other" was selected for an interoperability method, please describe it here.

Future Radio System Requirements
This section contains features and functionality desired in a Radio Communications System. Please rate the importance of the following system attributes to your Agency for a future radio system.

These system attributes are characteristics that COULD be emphasized in a new system design.

Please rate each attribute according to importance for your operation using the rating scale defined below. "Click" on the button to select your desired response. Please answer all questions to the best of your ability. You can change any response.

Rating Scale:

0. Attribute is NOT IMPORTANT to the user.

1. Attribute is MINIMALLY IMPORTANT to the user.
1725
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

26 2. Attribute is NICE TO HAVE, could enhance operations.

3. Attribute is USEFUL, will promote more efficient day to day operation.

4. QUITE IMPORTANT, lack could result in degradation of mission, injury, or loss of property.

5. CRITICAL, lack generally will result in injury, loss of property, or degradation of mission.

6. Don't Know, insufficient information available to answer this question.

Radio Coverage
Improved Voice Radio Coverage: The system should provide radio coverage evenly distributed over the service area for all operational functions. The goal is for there to be no dead spots.

The system shall provide a signal availability of 95 percent to/from mobile radios, with coverage evenly distributed over the service area for all operational functions.

In-Building Coverage: The radio system should provide in-building coverage in the metropolitan areas and in other areas where appropriate.

The system shall provide a signal availability of 95 percent to/from portables in building.

Minimize Interference: The system should minimize or eliminate interference.

Radio Voice Operations
Increased Channel Capacity: The system design shall include additional channels for current and future capacity. Additional channels are important to alleviate congestion on the dispatch and incident channels.

On-Scene Fireground/Tactical Communications Channels: The system design should include licensed simplex frequencies for use by fire departments on-scene.

Direct radio-to-radio frequencies (firegrounds) enable local incident communications inbuilding, below grade, and in other situations where repeated channels do not offer solid coverage.

Monitored Firegrounds: The system design should provide a means or routing fireground channels to dispatch. Fireground communications must be available to be monitored by dispatch, command personnel, or recording.

Emergency Alerting: The radios and system shall provide an emergency function for alerting dispatch and supervisors to the need for assistance.

Workgroup Oriented Operation: The system shall be organized with sufficient channels or talk groups to allow departmental workgroups to have their own channel or talk group.

Voice Security: The system shall provide encrypted communications for users that need to prevent unauthorized interception of sensitive information.

Operational Boundary Transparency: The radio system design shall utilize multiple tower sites, and to the extent possible, automatically switch to the correct site, transparent to the radio user.

System operation will be logical, with the focus on whom the user wants to call rather than where they are located. Changes in the user Agencies' operational boundaries shall be transparent to radio users. The radio system shall allow any group or department to operate with full communications capability within the service area.

One System Serves All Agencies: One radio system shall support all Public Safety agencies including all Law Enforcement, Fire agencies and Emergency Medical Service agencies. It may also support Public Service agencies.
1726
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

27 Convenient, same-radio communications is important between all Public Safety agencies within the Locality.

Interoperability through Dispatch: The radio system shall provide a connection between all dispatch operations allowing dispatchers to facilitate information flow between agencies through dispatch and incident command, rather than at the user level.

Interoperability with Adjacent Localities: The radio system design shall emphasize compatibility with radio systems in the adjacent localities to enable public safety users to assist in adjacent counties (and visa versa) and communicate with users from other Public Safety agencies using their assigned radios.

Interoperability with State Agencies: The radio system design should emphasize compatibility with radio systems in use by the State to facilitate communications with State agencies.

Interoperability with Federal Agencies: The radio system design shall emphasize compatibility with radio systems in use by the Federal agencies operating in the locality.

While local agencies cannot operate radio on Federal channels, compatible equipment would facilitate Federal/local cooperative efforts if Federal users could communicate over the locality infrastructure.

Person Location: The radio system shall include radio location technology to map the location of user radios.

Dispatch can determine the location of a user (to his portable or mobile radio), useful for example when sending assistance.

System Control: The Locality is significantly more comfortable with the high level of system control that comes with exclusive use and system ownership.

Text Messaging: The mobiles and portable radios shall be capable of text messaging.

Dual Band Operation: The user radios need to operate on both VHF and 700 / 800 MHz.

Recorder Operations: The system design shall provide the capability of recording audio for all Public Safety agencies using the system.

Logged audio is important for all dispatch and incident communications.

Dispatch Operations
Increased Dispatch Channel Capacity: The system shall provide for sufficient channels for dispatch operations.

Dispatch Capacity: The dispatch system shall provide sufficient consoles and dispatcher positions so that a dispatcher can be contacted whenever one is needed.

Dispatch Coverage: Users can contact dispatchers via radio from anywhere in the operational area.

Mobile Data Functions
One Mobile Data Network Serves All Agencies: One mobile data system shall support all Public Safety agencies.

A common system is important for compatibility and to avoid duplication of equipment, operation, and maintenance.
1727
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

28 Cross CAD Interconnection: The system design shall include a means of exchanging information across different CAD systems.

CAD information exchange is important for information database sharing.

Mobile Data Criticality: The mobile data system is equally important to public safety communication as the voice radio system.

The mobile data system will be designed to meet the same critical communications standards as the voice radio system.

Vehicle Location: Automatic vehicle location (AVL) shall allow vehicles to be located by by dispatch.

Unit location information can assist dispatch in selecting units for incident response and by incident commanders for checking location status of assigned units.

EMS Telemetry: The mobile data radio network shall support telemetry of EMS patient data.

This function is needed in the vehicle while en route and patient-side in the field.

High-Speed Broadband Service: The system design shall include locations with access to wireless broadband service. High bandwidth service is important for advanced surveillance applications, exchange of bulky files, access to bandwidth intensive Locality information, and laptop maintenance.

Mobile Applications: The mobile data system shall be designed around an application set suitable for routine law enforcement and fire operations.

These capabilities typically include:
 CAD dispatch
 Records access
 Unit status
 Sheriff civil process
 In-car mapping
 Messaging
 Email
 State and National Queries
 Access to electronically stored reference materials
 Other law, fire, public service specific applications  Fingerprints
 Image Files (Mug Shots)
Advanced Mobile Applications: The mobile data system shall include capacity and capability for advanced applications for law enforcement and fire operations.

Advanced capabilities include:
 Video Surveillance
 Field biometrics
 Mobile access to many types of Locality information
 Larger photos
 Field citations
 Field reports
Access Locality / Agency Information: The mobile data radio network shall provide access to Locality GIS information.

Transfer of this type information tends to require significant bandwidth and may be offered over wireless broadband or be provided as local MDC or laptop files. 1728
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

29 Paging and Alerting Operations
Private Personnel Paging: The radio infrastructure shall include a private paging system and pagers for alerting individuals and groups of users in any agency.

Private paging helps assure rapid and reliable paging using dedicated equipment with guaranteed capacity.

Fire Station Alerting: The radio infrastructure shall include equipment for alerting individual fire stations.

Paging over Cellular: The paging system shall include a means of delivering pages over secondary path through commercial wireless service to cellular phones or PDA devices.

This capability provides a backup paging service and also out-of-town paging.

Infrastructure Capabilities
Future Expansion: The system shall be capable of future expansion in the number of channels and the number of users. System design shall incorporate expansion to the level of usage predicted for the next 15 years with only the addition of equipment.

Owner-Controlled Connectivity Network: The system shall be interconnected using a dedicated interconnecting backbone network, such as microwave or fiber.

The goal is to maximize reliability, minimize use of leased carriers and associated costs, and maintain control of the network. Additionally, a dedicated, highly reliable network interconnecting all major radio locations is highly desired. This can be via microwave or fiber
Microwave Additional Capacity: The network design shall include extra capacity, over and above the radio and mobile data needs, for other Locality uses.

Regional Connectivity: The system design shall provide infrastructure connectivity to adjacent areas.

OTAP: The system shall provide for Over-the-Air-Programming of radios.

The radios shall be capable of being reprogrammed over-the-air.

OTAR: The system shall provide for Over-the-Air-Rekeying of encrypted radios.

Over-the-Air-Reflash: The system shall provide for over-the-air upgrades to operating software or new software versions for mobiles and portables.

Reliability and Availability
Survivability: The system shall be designed to survive in severe weather or emergency conditions.

If dispatch points are shifted from their primary to a backup location, radio control shall be available at the backup location to the same degree it was available at primary dispatch.

Reliability/Failure Hierarchy: The radio system and equipment must be designed such that single-mode failures do not perceptibly impact the routine operations of the system.

The following requirements shall apply to failure conditions:
 Channel failure: no operating impact due to failed voice channel.  Site failure: no operating impact except reduced coverage area.  Primary power failure: UPS backup shall be supplied for all communications equipment, and generator backup for the radio equipment. 1729
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

30  Console failures: Single console failure: use reserve console. Console common equipment failure: dispatchers operate co-located radio control station.

Communications Center failure: Dispatch using radio control stations at a backup dispatch center.

Single Points of Failure: The system shall, as much as practical, minimize single points of failure.

This is accomplished through redundant equipment, multi-node network design, distributed processing, backup equipment, etc.

Power Backup: All fixed radio equipment shall require backup power with automatic transfer, capable of handling 100 percent loading of radio equipment. An uninterruptible power system (UPS) shall be required for all communications equipment.

Training and Maintenance
Staffing and Training: The system vendor shall provide formal training for system administrators, supervisors, dispatchers, radio users, and maintenance technicians.

Centralized Maintenance: The Locality / Agency prefers to centrally maintain and administer the radio system, dispatch systems, and user radios, either in-house or using a service shop.

Centralized maintenance provides consistent and coordinated services for all user departments.

Cost and Procurement
Competitive Procurement Process: The overall system concept shall be available from more than one vendor allowing a competitive procurement process.

Equipment shall be procured using open non-restrictive, competitive specifications.

Award to be based on the most cost-effective system meeting the specified operational and functional requirements.

Commonality of Equipment: A single vendor shall install and supply all required equipment; as much as possible, user equipment shall be similar in operation and maintenance requirements.

The goal is to minimize spare parts inventory and multiple vendor training requirements.

Multiple Sources: Compatible user equipment shall be available from multiple vendors. Competitive procurement of user equipment is more important than equipment commonality.

Phased Implementation: As much as possible, system procurement and implementation shall occur on a phased basis, allowing costs to be spread over several years. The radio system shall be designed to add user groups to the system over time.

Tiered Subscriber Cost: High-, mid-, and low-tier radio equipment with feature sets and costs matched to the user group shall be provided.

The initial cost of user radios is a prime concern in the evaluation of proposed alternatives.

Radio System Needs
What radio system Features or Technologies do you need that you don't have today?
1730
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

31 Mobile Data System Needs
What mobile data Features or Technologies do you need that you don't have today?
Value Added Comments
In this Additional Comments section of the survey, please provide any additional comments by typing them in the answer field to the right of the question. Your answers will be helpful in the overall communication system study. After completing this section, please proceed by clicking the Next button.

Voice Radio System
What is working well today?
Describe the aspects of the Communications System which are working well today.

Which areas need the most improvement?
Describe the areas which need the most improvement.

Additional related comments
Please provide any additional related comments.

Mobile Data System
What is working well today?
Describe the aspects of the Communications System which are working well today.

Which areas need the most improvement?
Describe the areas which need the most improvement.

Additional related comments
Please provide any additional related comments.
9-1-1 System
What is working well today?
Describe the aspects of the Communications System which are working well today.

Which areas need the most improvement?
Describe the areas which need the most improvement.

Additional related comments
Please provide any additional related comments.
1731
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

32 Table C-1 Alameda County Trunked Radio Problems
Problems Overall Fire Law Enforcement
Regional Interoperability: 3.9 5.0 3.8Limited Coverage: 2.6 2.0 2.6Equipment Maintainability: 2.2 1.0 2.3System Busies: 2.1 1.0 2.2System Reliability: 2.1 5.0 1.8Capacity: 1.9 1.0 2.0Indoor Portable Operation: 1.9 0.0 2.1Interference: 1.8 0.0 2.0Interoperability: 1.8 0.0 1.9Talk Group Congestion: 1.5 0.0 1.6Outdoor Portable Operation: 1.1 0.0 1.2Dispatcher Access: 0.9 2.0 0.8Complex Operation: 0.4 0.0 0.50 : No problem identified.1 : Identified problem, currently not of concern. May become a concern in the future.2 : Occasionally a problem, affects some operations but is generally worked around.3 : Regularly a problem, operations are routinely affected to the extent there is a loss of operational efficiency.4 : Frequently a problem, frequently affects operations, compromises the ability of the user to fulfill his mission.5 : Critical concern, usually affects operations, potential compromise to safety of user or of citizen.

Trunked Radio Problems
Table C-1
Alameda County
1732
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

33 Table C-2 Alameda County Conventional Radio Problems Problems Overall Fire
Law
Enforcement Other
Regional Interoperability: 2.6 0.6 3.6 4.0Indoor Portable Operation: 2.4 1.8 2.9 2.5Limited Coverage: 2.1 1.5 2.7 2.3Interoperability: 1.8 0.3 2.7 3.0Interference: 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.3Mobile to Mobile: 1.5 0.4 2.0 2.5Outdoor Portable Operation: 1.3 1.0 1.0 2.5Channel Congestion: 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.3Channel Unavailable: 1.0 0.8 1.2 1.0Capacity: 0.9 0.5 0.8 2.0Equipment Maintainability: 0.8 0.3 1.0 1.7System Reliability: 0.7 0.3 0.9 1.3Dispatcher Access: 0.3 0.0 0.3 1.0Complex Operation: 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.30 : No problem identified.1 : Identified problem, currently not of concern. May become a concern in the future.2 : Occasionally a problem, affects some operations but is generally worked around.3 : Regularly a problem, operations are routinely affected to the extent there is a loss of operational efficiency.4 : Frequently a problem, frequently affects operations, compromises the ability of the user to fulfill his mission. 5 : Critical concern, usually affects operations, potential compromise to safety of user or of citizen.

Conventional Radio Problems
Alameda County
Table C-2
1733
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

34 Table C-3 Contra Costa County Trunked Radio Problems Problem Overall Fire Law Enforcement Other Regional Interoperability: 3.2 2.7 3.7 2.0 Limited Coverage: 3.1 2.7 3.4 2.0 Indoor Portable Operation: 2.9 2.8 3.1 2.0 Equipment Maintainability: 2.7 3.8 2.2 2.0 System Reliability: 2.6 2.2 2.8 2.0 Interference: 2.3 1.8 2.5 4.0 Interoperability: 2.1 1.3 2.6 1.0 System Busies: 2.0 2.7 1.8 0.0 Outdoor Portable Operation: 1.6 1.5 1.7 1.0 Capacity: 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.0 Talk Group Congestion: 0.9 1.7 0.6 0.0 Dispatcher Access: 0.8 0.7 1.0 0.0 Complex Operation: 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.0 0: No problem identified 1: Identified problem, currently not a concern. May become a concern in the future. 2: Occasionally a problem, operations but is generally worked around. 3: Regularly a problem, operations are routinely affected to the extent there is a loos of operational efficiency. 4: Frequently a problem, frequently affects operations, compromises the ability of the user to fulfill his mission.5: Crtical concern, usually affects operations, potential compromise to safety of user or of citizen.

Table C-3
Contra Costa County
Trunked Radio Problems
1734
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

35 Table C-4 Contra Costa County Conventional Radio Problems Problem Overall Fire Law Enforcement
Regional Interoperability: 2.7 5.0 1.5Limited Coverage: 1.8 2.0 1.7Indoor Portable Operation: 1.3 2.0 1.0Interoperability: 1.0 1.0 1.0Channel Unavailable: 0.3 0.0 0.3Channel Congestion: 0.3 0.0 0.3Interference: 0.3 1.0 0.0Mobile to Mobile: 0.0 0.0 0.0Outdoor Portable Operation: 0.0 0.0 0.0System Reliability: 0.0 0.0 0.0Capacity: 0.0 0.0 0.0Complex Operation: 0.0 0.0 0.0Dispatcher Access: 0.0 0.0 0.0Equipment Maintainability: 0.0 0.0 0.00: No problem identified1: Identified problem, currently not a concern. May become a concern in the future.2: Occasionally a problem, operations but is generally worked around.3: Regularly a problem, operations are routinely affected to the extent there is a loos of operational efficiency.4: Frequently a problem, frequently affects operations, compromises the ability of the user to fulfill his mission.5: Crtical concern, usually affects operations, potential compromise to safety of user or of citizen.

Table C-4
Contra Costa County
Conventional Radio Problems
1735
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

36 Table C-5 EBRCSA System Attribute Ranking
Ref Attributes Overall Fire Law Enforcement Other
ff Power Backup 4.9 4.9 4.9 5.0
dd Reliability/Failure Hierarchy 4.9 4.8 4.9 5.0
cc Survivability 4.8 4.8 4.9 4.8
ee Single Points of Failure 4.8 4.8 4.9 5.0
a Improved Voice Radio Coverage 4.8 4.6 4.9 4.8b In-Building Coverage 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.6 gg Staffing and Training 4.6 4.4 4.7 4.4
c Minimize Interference 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.6
g Emergency Alerting 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.2
j Operational Boundary Transparency 4.4 4.3 4.5 3.8
v Future Expansion 4.4 4.1 4.5 4.0
w Owner-Controlled Connectivity Network 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.0 m Interoperability with Adjacent Localities 4.2 4.3 4.2 3.8 t Recorder Operations 4.1 4.1 4.2 3.2
x Microwave Additional Capacity 4.1 3.8 4.2 4.2
hh Centralized Maintenance 4.1 4.3 3.8 4.8
y Regional Connectivity 4.0 3.8 4.1 3.6
l Interoperability through Dispatch 3.9 3.9 4.0 3.4
Ratings0 - Attribute is NOT IMPORTANT to the user.1 - Attribute is MINIMALLY IMPORTANT to the user.2 - Attribute is NICE TO HAVE, could enhance operations.3 - Attribute is USEFUL, will promote more efficient day to day operation.4 - QUITE IMPORTANT, lack could result in degradation of mission, injury, or loss of property.5 - CRITICAL, lack generally will result in injury, loss of property, or degradation of mission.Note: To identify further information about an attribute, look up the Ref column in Section C-4.

Table C-5
EBRCSA
System Attribute Ranking
1736
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

37 Ref Attributes Overall Fire Law Enforcement Other
h Workgroup Oriented Operation 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.2e On-Scene Fireground / Tactical Communications Channels 3.8 4.4 3.5 4.3 z OTAP 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.8
jj Commonality of Equipment 3.7 3.4 3.8 3.7
aa OTAR 3.7 3.5 3.8 3.8
u Vehicle Location 3.7 3.9 3.7 2.8d Increased Channel Capacity 3.7 3.6 3.8 3.8 s Dual Band Operation 3.6 4.1 3.4 3.6
bb Over-the-Air-Reflash 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.6
f Monitored Firegrounds 3.6 4.4 3.1 3.5
ii Competitive Procurement Process 3.6 3.8 3.6 3.5
mm Tiered Subscriber Cost 3.5 3.4 3.7 4.0
n Interoperability with State Agencies 3.5 4.1 3.4 2.8
kk Multiple Sources 3.4 3.7 3.3 3.8
ll Phased Implementation 3.4 2.9 3.4 4.3
k One System Serves All Agencies 3.3 3.3 3.3 2.8
p Person Location 3.3 3.3 3.4 2.0
i Voice Security 3.2 1.6 4.1 2.2
q System Control 2.7 2.8 2.5 3.8o Interoperability with Federal Agencies 2.6 2.8 2.6 2.0 r Text Messaging 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.0
Ratings0 - Attribute is NOT IMPORTANT to the user.1 - Attribute is MINIMALLY IMPORTANT to the user.2 - Attribute is NICE TO HAVE, could enhance operations.3 - Attribute is USEFUL, will promote more efficient day to day operation.4 - QUITE IMPORTANT, lack could result in degradation of mission, injury, or loss of property.5 - CRITICAL, lack generally will result in injury, loss of property, or degradation of mission.Note: To identify further information about an attribute, look up the Ref column in Section C-4.

Table C-5 (Continued)
EBRCSA
System Attribute Ranking
1737
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

38 Table C-6 Alameda County 911 Dispatch Center
Submission Id
Locality
Type
Locality
Name
Agency
Discipline Agency Name
Other
Agency
Name What is working well today?
Which areas need the most
improvement?
Additional related
comments
2360 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement
2372 County Alameda Fire Fire Today, so far everything.

Tommorow is a different day.... (sorry).

Typical lack of funding to provide appropriate number of qualified dispatch personnel 24/7/365.

Typical dispatch issues related to too few dispatchers doing too much work. Example might be one dispatcher serving entire PD and FD for a period of time. That's an avoidable accident waiting to happen. 2373 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement
2382 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement
2406 County Alameda Fire Fire No comment No Comment
2418 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement Dispatch Consoles are all very
reliable.

Intermittent radio issues and delay for repair. Dead spots for patrol officers using handpacks.

Overall the reliability of our current system is poor. Any time repairs are scheduled, we're left with the possibility of not having a reliable radio system; our current County Radio Repair technicians often leave us wondering if the whole system is going to fail. In general, we have too much issues with bleedover, squealing and squelching. 2420 County Alameda Fire Fire N
A NA N
A
2428 County Alameda Other Other GS
A
2434 County Alameda Fire Fire
2436 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement CAD to Telco connections work
well
Too many keyboards mice in play
2447 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement space for future growth
2452 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement In general this system has better
coverage and capabilities
The current trunking system (primary equipment) as it impacts dispatch centers is rapdily getting to old to maintain. We need to install a new system with growth potential 2470 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement
2479 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement overall reliabilty must be improved with all systems.
2480 County Alameda Law
Enforcement
Law Enforcement
Alameda County 911 Dispatch Center
Table C-6
1738
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

39 Table C-7 Alameda County Voice System
Submission
Id
Locality
Type
Locality
Name
Agency
Discipline
Agency
Name
Other Agency
Name What is working well today?
Which areas need the most
improvement? Additional related comments
2352 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Coverage2354 County Alameda Fire Fire The VHF system. Our primary communications system
(800Mhz), has passed the point of obsolesence and is now limping along on what limited parts can be found. We need a new, stable radio system from top to bottom. It needs to be P25 compatible and of comparable or higher quality in all ways than our current system. Improvements in coverage area are mandatory with a new system where our new system has entire buildings that we cannot communicate within. 2357 County Alameda Fire Fire
2360 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement We continue to be able to communicate. Resolving dead zone areas & spotty reception/transmission areas. Some interference.2372 County Alameda Fire Fire The simplistic (and reliable) VHF radio system in our small jurisdiction (one sq mile).

Age of equipment (which is soon to be replaced) and an inadequate amount of immediately available backup hardware.

Forward looking plans related to interoperability with neighboring mutual aid jurisdictions are guesstimates at best due to the fact we have no idea when they may start using a compatable (700/800 mhz?) system. This is compounded by a different county immediately to our north and a city (Berkeley) to our south which is apparently not interested in participating in the two county comm plan. Why spend $ to upgrade to a (700/800 mhz) system when your neighboring mutual aid jurisdictions don't? We do want to do the right thing today without realizing 5 years from today we spent money buying technology we still aren't using in day to day operations. We do hope the results of this survey shine a bright light on this subject and help to make it clear how today's dollars are best spent. 2373 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement ease of use for all users. coverage2382 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement2388 County Alameda Fire Fire The VHF radio system Our primary communications system
(800Mhz), has passed the point of obsolesence and is now limping along on what limited parts can be found. We need a new, stable radio system from top to bottom. It needs to be P25 compatible and of comparable or higher quality in all ways than our current system. Improvements in coverage area are mandatory with a new system where our new system has entire buildings that we cannot communicate within. 2406 County Alameda Fire Fire
everything is up for the most part and operational, but that can change at a moments notice.

Coverage, reliability and system support with people who understand fire operations.

Table C-7
Alameda County Voice System
1739
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

40 Submission
Id
Locality
Type
Locality
Name
Agency
Discipline
Agency
Name
Other Agency
Name What is working well today?
Which areas need the most
improvement? Additional related comments
2418 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement
Dispatch Consoles are all very reliable.

Intermittent radio issues and delay for repair. Dead spots for patrol officers using handpacks.

Overall the reliability of our current system is poor. Any time repairs are scheduled, we're left with the possibility of not having a reliable radio system; our current County Radio Repair technicians often leave us wondering if the whole system is going to fail. In general, we have too much issues with bleedover, squealing and squelching. 2420 County Alameda Fire Fire2423 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement2428 County Alameda Other Other GSA microwave backbone phasing on simulcast2434 County Alameda Fire Fire Dead Spots Too much air traffic.2436 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement In general system is functional. Removal of dead zones, interference issues. elimination of single points of failure In general the system is functional today, capacity for interoperability and increased reliability of coverage are key points
2447 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement dead spots and garbled transmissions 2452 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement overall, there is an improved coverage area all current equipment needs to be replaced, repairs are becoming too difficult 2453 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Nothing reception and ability to transmit2470 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement reliability 2477 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement In the coverage area communication is good Need broader range of coverage None 2479 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement
We do not have good in building coverage; we constantly have background noise and small areas with no, or very little, coverage. 2480 County Alameda Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Other than the need for more channels and improved interoperability, our system is We need more channels Your survey mentioned being able to sustain a weather emergency but not an earthquake. It will be of critical importance for you all to consider system survivability in an earthquake.

Table C-7 (Continued)
Alameda County Voice System
1740
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

41 Table C-8 Contra Costa 911 Dispatch Center Submission Id Locality
Type
Locality
Name
Agency
Discipline
Agency
Name
Other Agency
Name What is working well today? Which areas need the most improvement? Additional related
comments
2361 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement2374 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Telephone System. Minimal, if any, interuptions to emergency communications has been experienced. Superior support that is both timely and efficient. Resolutions to problems are implemented quickly. Knowledgable support and excellent problem reporting system in place that prioritizes and responds to problems appropriately. 2381 County Contra Costa Fire Fire
Calls are dispatched in a timely manner., EMD dispatch., Knowledge and ability of dispatchers., 2389 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Our Vesta 911 system is new and works well. Our dispatch center badly needs to be upgraded and re-configured. It's too small and the furniture is not ergonomically correct. integration between admin phones and 911 phones. we currently have two different systems that are configured to work together but there are some issues with transferring to VoiceMail,etc. It works but is confusing. 2393 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement N/A, we do not have a dispact center.2395 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement2404 County Contra Costa Fire Fire 2407 County Contra Costa Other Other County Connection
2415 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Recently puchased a new CAD system and we need to get a number of bugs fixed. Continued practice using the system.
2419 County Contra Costa Fire Fire VERY RELAIBLE2421 County Contra Costa Fire Fire very reliable and robust diaptch infrastructure Equipment is aging2422 County Contra Costa Fire Fire We need dedicated Fire dispatchers2425 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Center is great. None 2426 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Table C-8
Contra Costa 911 Dispatch Center
1741
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

42 Table C-9 Contra Costa County Voice System
Submission Id
Locality
Type Locality Name
Agency
Discipline Agency Name
Other Agency
Name
What is working
well today? Which areas need the most improvement? Additional related comments 2345 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement overal clarity of transmissions Uniform, uniterrupted coveragae none2346 County Contra Costa Fire Fire 2350 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Radio area coverage. Immediate interoperability with area agencies 2353 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Our system has a default built in wherein if the system loses power, there is still some coverage. Unfortunately, that "some coverage" does not include the agencies we dispatch for. We have tried to get cooperation from the host agency, but have been unable to get them to see the importance of maintaining radios for everyone by splitting the default. 2355 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement System works well overall Additional channels we are maxing out our current system
2356 County Contra Costa Other Other
Department of Information Technology - Telecom Radio
VHF coverage analog is working well for our Fire dept.

North and East County coverage. In building coverage County wide. ..
2358 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement The radio system works fine most of the time, but when it fails, it fails completely. This happens more frequently than it should.

Radio dead spots have been a problem since the inception of the radio system. This has never been addressed by system administrators. 2361 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement coverage. simulcast boadcasting.2362 County Contra Costa Other Other DoIT The radio systems
that are currently in place in Contra Costa County work well.

A few of the VHF frequencies that the Sheriff's Department and Fire Departments use have interference issues. It would be an improvement if these frequencies could be replaced with clear frequencies.

Interoperabilty. It's quite the buzzword these days. This word has been thrown around a lot in order to justify Alameda and Contra Costa Counties build a new regional radio system. The current design is dangerously flawed and expensive. There is a single point of failure in this design. The proposed system is underdesigned. The vendor keeps coming back with "new and improved" design versions in order to achive what is already in place with the current radio systems. This is a "buyer beware" radio system that has been proposed. The vendor that has been chosen to build this digital radio system, once the vendor has equipment in place will have the agencies involved "by the balls" as it were. By his own admission, the vendor is "trying to get his foot in the door" in Contra Costa County. Once the County is married to this system, there would be no turning back. I could go on and on. I do not have enough time to do so. Just remember Alameda County needs a new radio system. Contra Costa County does not. 2363 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Line of sight traqnsmission. Dead spot due to geography. None 2374 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Day to day normal operations of radio system work ok
More time efficient support of Radio systems is needed. The ability to recognize problem, identify cause and provide a quick solution to communication problems associated with this system is essential and currently lacking. Quick resolution to problems associated to systems is imparative to emergency operations.

The telephone system, on the other hand, has been supported well by vendors ensuring that essential communication is always available. They are a great model for communication systems in public safety.

Table C-9
Contra Costa County Voice System
1742
CTA Communications East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA)

43 Submission Id
Locality
Type
Locality
Name
Agency
Discipline Agency Name
Other Agency
Name What is working well today? Which areas need the most improvement? Additional related comments 2378 County Contra Fire Fire All systems working well
2381 County Contra Costa Fire Fire
Dispatch, Quick and efficient response to questions and/or problems., Maintenance, Coverage and clarity, Ability for statewide communications Coverage within large buildings or garages (commercial type structures), All local fire agencies should be on the same system!, Single source purchasing with discounts available to group members. 2389 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement our system works fairly well within our city. coverage,quality and ability to talk to other agencies. Ability to talk from inside a building, programming and GPS location. We live in a hilly area where coverage is sometimes a problem. 2392 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement2393 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement We are members of the West County Radio Consortium. This allows us to communicate freely with a few surrounding agencies.

Ability to communicate freely with all surrounding agencies. 2394 County Contra
Ct
Fire Fire VHF signal continuity System redesign forcing expensive future investment. 2395 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Maintenance and Coverage2398 County Contra Costa Fire Fire Radio coverage is quite good - we do have a few weak spots but over all good Weak signal spots2404 County Contra Fire Fire The existing system works well2407 County Contra Costa Other Other County Connection Both AVL and CAD screens work well part time. The system gets overloaded and fades out from time to time. To clear up the dead spots thruout the system.2410 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement When the Richmond system is up, and as long as we stay in or close to our City the regular communications are good. The ability to speak with the Sheriffs Office and Highway Patrol, as well as with fire in a major event. Also radio coverage is terrible going east, we have to switch to cell phones.2413 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement2415 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Have local control and sufficient capacity. Coverage and communicating with multiple jurisdictions.2416 County Contra Costa Other Other District Attorney Investigations Dispatchers, agencies sharing equipment. Update of equipment and expansion of capabilities to communicate with more agencies on various radio systems. Portability of MDC unit(s) for our small investigative unit.2419 County Contra Costa Fire Fire Completely Interoperable with all Contra Costa area local, state, and federal fire assets. Interoperability with Alameda County, more tactical channels2421 County Contra Costa Fire Fire System is interoperable with all, Local, State and Federal fire partner agencies. Not enough tactical channels and Dispatch is not on the Tac channels. 2422 County Contra Costa Fire Fire
The County VHF/MDC system our 800 system, accountability for system failures, increased training in the dispatch centers. Dedicated Fire dispatchers Short term use equipment for site failures. aka portable repeater to get the system back up and running while fixes occur. 2425 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement We have a system that works for us but not well for contact with others who have different systems (ie 800 mhz) ability to talk to all governmental agencies, first law enforecment second everyone else2426 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Voice radio, data system and data sharing Interopabilty we need to be able to talk to all publuic safety to include public works ect...in the region....roaming2445 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Overall reliability of system in place. Emergency notification buttons on portables, wi-fi in vehicles, and improved communication mechanisms with allied agencies to improve interoperability.2451 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement all coverage none2456 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement general communications battery life and dead spots2473 County Contra Costa Law Enforcement Law Enforcement Table C-9 (Continued)
Contra Costa County Voice System
1743
CTA Communications
...providing innovative and sustainable solutions for the future www.ctacommunications.com
1744

National Emergency
Communications Plan
PRELIMINARY DRAFT v1.02
National Emergency
Communications Plan
July 2008
Rev. Aug 7, 2008
1745
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Message from the Secretary
Numerous after-action reports from major incidents throughout the history of emergency management in our Nation have cited communications difficulties among the many responding agencies as a major failing and challenge to policymakers. Congress and the Administration have recognized that a successful response to a future major incident— either a terrorist attack or natural disaster—requires a coordinated, interoperable response by the Nation’s public safety, public health, and emergency management community, both public and private, at the Federal, State, tribal, territorial, regional, and local levels.

Recognizing the need for an overarching strategy to help coordinate and guide such efforts, Congress directed the Department of Homeland Security to develop the first National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP). The purpose of the NECP is to promote the ability of emergency response providers and relevant government officials to continue to communicate in the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters and to ensure, accelerate, and attain interoperable emergency communications nationwide.

Natural disasters and acts of terrorism have shown that there is no simple solution—or “silver bullet”—to solve the communications problems that still plague law enforcement, firefighting, rescue, and emergency medical personnel.

To strengthen emergency communications capabilities nationwide, the Plan focuses on technology, coordination, governance, planning, usage, training and exercises at all levels of government. This approach recognizes that communications operability is a critical building block for interoperability; emergency response officials first must be able to establish communications within their own agency before they can interoperate with neighboring jurisdictions and other agencies.

The NECP seeks to build on the substantial progress that we have made over the last several years. Among the key developments at the Federal, State, regional, and local levels are:
• Most Federal programs that support emergency communications have been consolidated within a single agency— DHS—to improve the alignment, integration, and coordination of the Federal mission.
• All 56 States and U.S. territories have developed Statewide Communication Interoperability Plans (SCIP) that identify near- and long-term initiatives for improving communications interoperability.
• The Nation’s 75 largest urban and metropolitan areas maintain policies for interoperable communications.
1746
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
• The SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum is widely accepted and used by the emergency response community to address critical elements for planning and implementing interoperability solutions. These elements include governance, standard operating procedures, technology, training and exercises, and usage of interoperable communications.
• The DHS Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is establishing Regional Emergency Communications Coordination (RECC) Working Groups in each of the 10 FEMA regions to coordinate multi-state efforts and measure progress on improving the survivability, sustainability, and interoperability of communications at the regional level.

In developing the NECP, DHS worked closely with stakeholders from all levels of government to ensure that their priorities and activities were addressed. The Department will continue to coordinate with Federal, State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector, to ensure that the NECP is implemented successfully.

Ultimately, the NECP’s goals cannot be achieved without the support and dedication of the emergency response community that was instrumental in crafting it. I ask everyone within the emergency response community to take ownership of the NECP’s initiatives and actions and to dedicate themselves to meeting the key benchmarks. Working together, we can achieve our vision:

Emergency responders can communicate—
As needed, on demand, and as authorized;
At all levels of government; and
Across all disciplines.

Michael Chertoff
Secretary of Homeland Security
1747
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Table of Contents
Executive Summary.................................................................................................... ES-1

1. Introduction....................................................................................................................

1.1 Purpose of the National Emergency Communications Plan............................. 1

1.2 Scope of the National Emergency Communications Plan................................. 2

1.3 Organization of the NECP ................................................................................... 5

2. Defining the Future State of Emergency Communications .................................... 6

2.1 Vision...................................................................................................................... 6

2.2 Goals....................................................................................................................... 6

2.3 Capabilities Needed .............................................................................................. 7

3. Achieving the Future State of Emergency Communications.................................. 9 Objective 1: Formal Governance Structures and Clear Leadership Roles.. 11 Objective 2: Coordinated Federal Activities.................................................... 16 Objective 3: Common Planning and Operational Protocols ......................... 20 Objective 4: Standards and Emerging Communication Technologies......... 24 Objective 5: Emergency Responder Skills and Capabilities.......................... 28 Objective 6: System Life-Cycle Planning ........................................................ 31 Objective 7: Disaster Communications Capabilities ...................................... 34

4. Implementing and Measuring Achievement of the NECP..................................... 39

5. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 41 1748
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

ES-1
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

Executive Summary
Every day in cities and towns across the Nation, emergency response personnel respond to incidents of varying scope and magnitude. Their ability to communicate in real time is critical to establishing command and control at the scene of an emergency, to maintaining event situational awareness, and to operating overall within a broad range of incidents.

However, as numerous after-action reports and national assessments have revealed, there are still communications deficiencies that affect the ability of responders to manage routine incidents and support responses to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other incidents.1
Recognizing the need for an overarching emergency communications strategy to address these shortfalls, Congress directed the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Office of Emergency Communications (OEC) to develop the first National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP). Title XVIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 United States Code 101 et seq.), as amended, calls for the NECP to be developed in coordination with stakeholders from all levels of government and from the private sector.

In response, DHS worked with stakeholders from Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies to develop the NECP—a strategic plan that establishes a national vision for the future state of emergency communications. The desired future state is that emergency responders can communicate:

As needed, on demand, and as authorized
At all levels of government
Across all disciplines
To measure progress toward this vision, three strategic goals were established:

Goal 1—By 2010, 90 percent of all high-risk urban areas designated within the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI)2
are able to demonstrate response-level
emergency communications3
within one hour for routine events involving
multiple jurisdictions and agencies.

Goal 2—By 2011, 75 percent of non-UASI jurisdictions are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within one hour for routine events involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies.

Goal 3—By 2013, 75 percent of all jurisdictions are able to demonstrate responselevel emergency communications within three hours, in the event of a significant incident as outlined in national planning scenarios. 1 Examples include The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned, February 2006; The 9-11 Commission Report, July 2004; and The Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina, February 2006. 2 As identified in FY08 Homeland Security Grant Program or on the FEMA Grants website:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/uasi/fy08_uasi_guidance.pdf. 3 Response-level emergency communication refers to the capacity of individuals with primary operational leadership responsibility to manage resources and make timely decisions during an incident involving multiple agencies, without technical or procedural communications impediments. 1749
ES-2
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

To realize this national vision and meet these goals, the NECP established the following seven objectives for improving emergency communications for the Nation’s Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency responders:

1. Formal decision-making structures and clearly defined leadership roles coordinate emergency communications capabilities.

2. Federal emergency communications programs and initiatives are collaborative across agencies and aligned to achieve national goals.

3. Emergency responders employ common planning and operational protocols to effectively use their resources and personnel.

4. Emerging technologies are integrated with current emergency communications capabilities through standards implementation, research and development, and testing and evaluation.

5. Emergency responders have shared approaches to training and exercises, improved technical expertise, and enhanced response capabilities.

6. All levels of government drive long-term advancements in emergency communications through integrated strategic planning procedures, appropriate resource allocations, and public-private partnerships.

7. The Nation has integrated preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery capabilities to communicate during significant events.

The NECP also provides recommended initiatives and milestones to guide emergency response providers and relevant government officials in making measurable improvements in emergency communications capabilities. The NECP recommendations help to guide, but do not dictate, the distribution of homeland security funds to improve emergency communications at the Federal, State, and local levels, and to support the NECP implementation.

Communications investments are among the most significant, substantial, and longlasting capital investments that agencies make; in addition, technological innovations for emergency communications are constantly evolving at a rapid pace. With these realities in mind, DHS recognizes that the emergency response community will realize this national vision in stages, as agencies invest in new communications systems and as new technologies emerge.

There is no simple solution, or “silver bullet,” for solving emergency communications challenges, and consequently DHS’ approach to the NECP involves making improvements at all levels of government, in technology, coordination and governance, planning, usage, and training and exercises. This approach also recognizes that communications operability is a critical building block for interoperability; emergency response officials must first establish reliable communications within their own agency before they can interoperate with neighboring jurisdictions and other agencies.

Finally, DHS acknowledges that the Nation does not have unlimited resources to address deficiencies in emergency communications. Consequently, the NECP will be used to identify and prioritize investments to move the Nation toward this vision. As required by Congress, the NECP will be a living document subject to periodic review and updates by DHS in coordination with stakeholders. Future iterations will be revised based on progress made toward achieving the NECP’s goals, on variations in national priorities, and on lessons learned from after-action reports.
1750
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
1 1

1. Introduction
The ability of emergency responders to effectively communicate is paramount to the safety and security of our Nation. During the last three decades, the Nation has witnessed how inadequate emergency communications capabilities can adversely affect response and recovery efforts. Locally, agencies developed ad hoc solutions to overcome these challenges. The issue of inadequate coordination of emergency communications received national attention in the aftermath of the January 1982 passenger jet crash into the 14th Street Bridge (and, subsequently, the Potomac River) near downtown Washington, DC. The inability of multiple jurisdictions to coordinate a response to the Air Florida crash began to drive regional collaboration. More recently, the terrorist attacks of September 11, Hurricane Katrina, and other natural and man-made disasters have demonstrated how emergency communications capabilities—in particular the lack of those capabilities—impact emergency responders, public health, national and economic security, and the ability of government leaders to maintain order and perform essential functions.4
During each of these events, the lack of coordinated emergency communications solutions and protocols among the responding agencies hindered response and recovery efforts. These events raised awareness of the issue among public policymakers and highlighted the critical role emergency communications plays in incident response.

These events also prompted numerous national studies and assessments on the state of emergency communications, which in turn has helped DHS to formulate a unified approach for addressing emergency communications.5

1.1 Purpose of the National Emergency Communications Plan The Homeland Security Act of 2002, as
amended in 2006, mandated the creation of an
overarching strategy to address emergency
communications shortfalls. In addition, the
emergency response community has sought
national guidance to support a more integrated
coordination of emergency communications
priorities and investments.
• Set national goals and priorities
for addressing deficiencies in the
Nation’s emergency
communications posture
• Provide recommendations and
milestones for emergency
response providers, relevant
government officials, and
Congress to improve emergency
communications capabilities
4 “Hurricane Katrina was the most destructive natural disaster in U.S. history. The storm crippled thirty-eight 911-call centers, disrupting local emergency services, and knocked out more than 3 million customer phone lines in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Broadcast communications were likewise severely affected, as 50 percent of area radio stations and 44 percent of area television stations went off the air.” White House Report, The Federal Response to Katrina: Lessons Learned, February 2006. 5
Such as the Final Report of the National Commission of Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, December 2001; the White House Report, The Federal Response to Katrina: Lessons Learned, February 2006; and the Independent Panel Reviewing the Impact of Hurricane Katrina on Communications Networks—Report and Recommendations to the Federal Communications Commission, June 12, 2006, all of which documented the numerous failures in emergency communications among emergency responders, which affected their ability to effectively respond to these incidents.
1751
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

2 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

As a result, Congress directed the DHS’ Office of Emergency Communications (OEC)6 to develop a plan to:
• Identify the capabilities needed by emergency responders to ensure the availability and interoperability of communications during emergencies, and identify obstacles to the deployment of interoperable communications systems; • Recommend both short- and long-term solutions for ensuring interoperability and continuity of communications for emergency responders, including recommendations for improving coordination among Federal, State, local, and tribal governments;
• Set goals and timeframes for the deployment of interoperable emergency communications systems, and recommend measures that emergency response providers should employ to ensure the continued operation of communications infrastructure;
• Set dates by which Federal agencies and State, local, and tribal governments expect to achieve a baseline level of national interoperable communications, and establish benchmarks to measure progress; and
• Guide the coordination of existing Federal emergency communications programs.7

1.2 Scope of the National Emergency Communications Plan The National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP) focuses on the emergency communications needs of response personnel in every discipline, at every level of government, and for the private sector and non-governmental organizations (NGO).

Emergency communications is defined as the ability of emergency responders to exchange information via data, voice, and video as authorized, to complete their missions. Emergency response agencies at all levels of government must have interoperable and seamless communications to manage emergency response, establish command and control, maintain situational awareness, and function under a common operating picture, for a broad scale of incidents.

Emergency communications consists of three primary elements:

1. Operability—The ability of emergency responders to establish and sustain communications in support of mission operations.

2. Interoperability—The ability of emergency responders to communicate among jurisdictions, disciplines, and levels of government, using a variety of frequency bands, as needed and as authorized. System operability is required for system interoperability.

3. Continuity of Communications—The ability of emergency response agencies to maintain communications in the event of damage to or destruction of the primary infrastructure.
6 The OEC supports the Secretary of Homeland Security in developing, implementing, and coordinating interoperable and operable communications for the emergency response community at all levels of government. The OEC was directed by Title XVIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended, to lead the development of a National Emergency Communications Plan. 7
Appendix 4 provides more detailed information on DHS programs supporting emergency communications. 1752
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

3 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
3 1.2.1 Approach to Developing the NECP
The majority of emergency incidents occur at the local level. Therefore, improving emergency communications—specifically, operability, interoperability, and continuity of communications—cannot be accomplished by the Federal Government alone. For this reason, working through OEC, DHS used a stakeholder-driven approach to develop the NECP, one that included representatives from the Federal, State, and local responder communities as well as from the private sector.8
Exhibit 1 lists the partnerships and
groups that provided input to the NECP.

Exhibit 1: Key Homeland Security and Emergency Communications Partnerships Entity Roles and Responsibilities

SAFECOM
Executive Committee
(EC) and Emergency
Response Council
(ERC)
The SAFECOM EC serves as the leadership group of the ERC and as the SAFECOM program’s primary resource to access public safety practitioners and policymakers. The EC provides strategic leadership and guidance to the SAFECOM program on emergency-responder user needs and builds relationships with the ERC to leverage the ERC subject matter expertise. The SAFECOM ERC is a vehicle to provide a broad base of input from the public safety community on its user needs to the SAFECOM program. The ERC provides a forum for individuals with specialized skills and common interests to share best practices and lessons learned so that interested parties at all levels of government can gain from one another’s experience. Emergency responders and policymakers from Federal, State, local, and tribal governments compose the SAFECOM EC and ERC.

Emergency
Communications
Preparedness Center
(ECPC)
The ECPC was created under the authority of Title XVIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended in 2006, to serve as the focal point and clearinghouse for intergovernmental information on interoperable emergency communications. The ECPC is an interdepartmental organization, currently composed of 12 Federal departments and agencies, that assesses and coordinates Federal emergency communications operability and interoperability assurance efforts. The ECPC is the focal point for interagency emergency communications efforts and seeks to minimize the duplication of similar activities within the Federal Government. It also acts as an information clearinghouse to promote operable and interoperable communications in an all-hazards environment.

Federal Partnership
for Interoperable
Communications
(FPIC)
The FPIC is a coordinating body that focuses on technical and operational matters within the Federal wireless communications community. Its mission is to address Federal wireless communications interoperability by fostering intergovernmental cooperation and by identifying and leveraging common synergies. The FPIC represents more than 40 Federal entities; its membership includes program managers of wireless systems, radio communications managers, Information Technology (IT) and Land Mobile Radio (LMR) specialists, and telecommunications engineers. State and local emergency responders participate as advisory members.

Project 25 Interface
Committee (APIC)
As part of the Project 25 (P25) standards development process, the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) developed the APIC to resolve issues that arose during that process. The APIC is composed of private sector representatives and emergency response officials and serves as a liaison to facilitate user community and private sector relationships regarding the evolution and use of P25 standards.

National Public
Safety
Telecommunications
Council (NPSTC)
The NPSTC is a federation of national public safety leadership organizations dedicated to improving emergency response communications and interoperability through collaborative leadership. The NPSTC is composed of State and local public safety representatives. In addition, Federal, Canadian, and other emergency communications partner organizations serve as liaisons to the NPSTC.
8 Appendix 6 details the three-phased approach to develop the NECP that relied on stakeholder involvement. 1753
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Entity Roles and Responsibilities
National Security
Telecommunications
Advisory
Committee (NSTAC)
The NSTAC is composed of up to 30 private sector executives who represent major communications and network service providers as well as IT, finance, and aerospace companies. Through the National Communications System (NCS), the NSTAC provides private sector-based analyses and recommendations to the President and the Executive Branch on policy and enhancements to national security and emergency preparedness (NS/EP) communications.

Critical Infrastructure
Partnership Advisory
Council (CIPAC)
The CIPAC is a DHS program established to facilitate effective coordination between government infrastructure protection programs and the infrastructure protection activities of the owners and operators of critical infrastructure and key resources. The CIPAC enables public and private sector representatives to engage in candid, substantive discussions regarding the protection of the Nation’s critical infrastructure.

The NECP has been designed to complement and support overarching homeland security and emergency communications legislation, strategies, and initiatives. The NECP applies guidance from these authorities, including key principles and priorities, to establish the first national strategic plan that is focused exclusively on improving emergency communications for emergency response providers nationwide. As demonstrated in Exhibit 2 below, the NECP provides a critical link between national communications priorities and strategic and tactical planning at the regional, State, and local levels.

Appendix 2 provides a comprehensive listing and explanation of these documents.

Exhibit 2: Key Homeland Security and Emergency Communications Authorities

NATIONAL NATIONAL

LEGISLATION &

STRATEGIES

PREPAREDNESS/

INCIDENT

MANAGEMENT

POLICY & PLANNING

INITIATIVES

DIRECTIVES &

EXECUTIVE ORDERS

REGIONAL, STATE, LOCAL REGIONAL, STATE, LOCAL
HSPDs(e.g., 5, 7, 8) EOs (e.g., 12406,3,
12472, 12656)

NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR

HOMELAND SECURITY

NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR

PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF CI/K

NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR HOMELAND SECURITY ACT PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF CI/KA HOMELAND SECURITY ACT

NRF, SUPPORT

FUNCTION

OPERATIONAL

NIPP NIPP

NATIONAL

PREPAREDNESS

GUIDELINES

NATIONAL

PREPAREDNESS

GUIDELINES
SCIPs SCIPS TICPs TICPS
Regional Strategic
Planning
Regional Strategic
Planning

STRATEGIC

PREPAREDNESS/

COMMUNICATIONS

PLANNING

INITIATIVES
Hazard Mitigation Hazard Mitigation
Emergency
Operations Plans
Emergency
Operations Plans
NIMS
HSPDs (e.g., 5, 7, 8) (e.g., 12046,
12472, 12656)
EOs

NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR

HOMELAND SECURITY
NECP
Communications-specific
4 1754
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
5 1.3 Organization of the NECP
The NECP establishes a national vision for the desired future state of emergency communications. It sets strategic goals, national objectives, and supporting initiatives to drive the Nation toward that future state. The NECP also provides recommended milestones to guide emergency response providers and relevant government officials as they make measurable improvements to their emergency communications capabilities.

As illustrated in Exhibit 3, the NECP approach is based on three logical steps that inform the organization of this document: 1) defining the future state of emergency communications; 2) developing a strategy to achieve the future state; and 3) implementing the future state and measuring how well it is being implemented.

1.3.1 Defining the Future State of Emergency Communications In this first step, DHS worked with stakeholders to develop an overall Vision statement (Section 2.1) and established three high-level Goals (Section 2.2) that define the desired future state of emergency communications. DHS then identified the emergency communications Capabilities Needed (Section 2.3) for the emergency response community to achieve the desired future state.

1.3.2 Developing a Strategy to Achieve the Future State Based on the capabilities needed for the emergency response community to achieve the desired future state, DHS developed seven Objectives (Section 3). Although all seven objectives were designed to support the realization of the long-term vision, execution of all initiatives and achievement of national milestones are not necessarily prerequisites for achieving the three goals. DHS will continue to work with its stakeholders on the implementation of the NECP initiatives and the attainment of these near-term goals. For each objective, DHS developed Supporting Initiatives (Section 3), which are intended to drive outcomes toward the future state. In crafting each initiative, DHS identified both current emergency communications activities that affect the initiative and key gaps that drive action in the initiative area. Finally, DHS identified Recommended National Milestones (Section 3) that detail the timeline and outcomes of each initiative.

Exhibit 3: NECP Approach and Organization
Future State
Vision
Goals
Capabilities
Strategy
Objectives
Initiatives
Milestones
Implementation
Coordination
Measurement
Evaluation Framework
NECP Approach and Organization

1.3.3 Implementing and Measuring Achievement of the Future State In the final step, DHS provides guidance for implementing the NECP and recommendations for measuring success (Section 4). These recommendations are based on the legislative requirements for the NECP as outlined in Appendix 1. 1755
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
• Across all disciplines

6 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
6 2. Defining the Future State of Emergency Communications The NECP outlines the future vision of emergency communications over the next five years. In doing so, it establishes tangible goals by which success can be measured.

2.1 Vision
The NECP vision is to ensure operability,
interoperability, and continuity of
communications to allow emergency
responders to communicate as needed, on
demand, and as authorized at all levels of
government and across all disciplines.

2.2 Goals
To work toward this desired future state, DHS defined a series of goals that establish a minimum level of interoperable communications and dates by which Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies are expected to achieve that minimum level. Although not comprehensive, these goals provide an initial set of operational targets which OEC will expand further through a process that engages Federal, State, and local governments, the private sector, and emergency responders. Section 4.2 outlines how OEC plans to measure the nationwide achievement of these goals.

If emergency responders train regularly and use emergency communications solutions daily, they will be able to use emergency communications more effectively during major incidents. Therefore, the first two goals focus on day-to-day response capabilities that will inherently enhance emergency response capabilities.

Response-level emergency communications is the capacity of individuals with primary operational leadership responsibility to manage resources and make timely decisions during an incident involving multiple agencies, without technical or procedural communications impediments.9
In addition to communicating with first-level
subordinates in the field, an Operations Section Chief should be able to communicate up the management chain to the incident command level (i.e., between the Operations Section Chief and Incident Command).10 During the course of incident response, Incident Command/Unified Command may move off-scene, which may require establishing communications between Incident Command and off-scene Emergency Operations Centers (EOC), dispatch centers, and other support groups.

Vision
Emergency response personnel
can communicate—
• As needed, on demand,
and as authorized
• At all levels of
government
9 As defined in the National Incident Command System 200, Unit 2: Leadership and Management. 10 As defined in the National Incident Management System, FEMA 501/Draft August 2007, p.47. 1756
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

7 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
7 NECP Goals
Goal 1—By 2010, 90 percent of all high-risk urban areas designated within the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI)11 are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within one hour for routine events12 involving multiple jurisdictions13 and agencies.

Goal 2—By 2011, 75 percent of non-UASI jurisdictions are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within one hour for routine events involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies.

Goal 3—By 2013, 75 percent of all jurisdictions are able to demonstrate responselevel emergency communications within three hours, in the event of a significant event14 as outlined in national planning scenarios.

The NECP identifies seven key objectives to move the Nation toward its overall vision.

Although all seven objectives are important to achieving all three goals, Objective 7 focuses primarily on enhancing the ability to communicate during a significant event as outlined in Goal 3. Further, through OEC and the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Regional Emergency Communications Coordination Working Groups (RECCWG), DHS will collaborate with State homeland security directors and State interoperability coordinators to develop appropriate methodologies to measure progress toward these goals in each State.

2.3 Capabilities Needed
Leveraging the findings from various sources of information, including analyses, from Federal, State, local, and tribal governments on emergency communications, DHS completed a comprehensive examination of emergency communications capabilities across all levels of government and some private sector entities.15 (A capability enables the accomplishment of a mission or task.) Exhibit 4 summarizes the range of emergency communications capabilities needed by emergency responders and maps those to the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum.
16 11 As identified in the FY08 Homeland Security Grant Program or on the FEMA Grants website:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/uasi/fy08_uasi_guidance.pdf. 12 Routine events—During routine events, the emphasis for response-level emergency communications is on operability and interoperability. These types of events are further delineated in the Usage element of the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum as planned events, localized emergency incidents, regional incident management (interstate or intrastate), and daily use throughout the region. See Appendix 5 for a further description of the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum. 13 Jurisdiction—A geographical, political, or system boundary as defined by each individual State. 14 Significant events—During significant events, the emphasis for response-level emergency communications is on interoperability and continuity of communications. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8: National Preparedness (HSPD-8) sets forth 15 National Planning Scenarios, highlighting a plausible range of significant events such as terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies that pose the greatest risks to the Nation. Any of these 15 scenarios should be considered when planning for a significant event during which all major emergency communications infrastructure is destroyed. 15 The National Communications Capabilities Report, 2008. 16 SAFECOM’s Interoperability Continuum was designed to help the emergency response community and Federal, State, local, and tribal policymakers address critical elements for success as they plan and implement interoperability solutions: http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/tools/continuum/default.html. 1757
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

8 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
8 These identified capabilities serve as the foundation for the NECP priority objectives, initiatives, and recommended national milestones set forth in Section 3.

Exhibit 4: Emergency Communications Capabilities Needed to Achieve Future State Lanes of the SAFECOM
Interoperability
Continuum
Capabilities Needed
Governance
• Strong government leadership
• Formal, thorough, and inclusive interagency governance structures
• Clear lines of communication and decision-making
• Strategic planning processes
Standard Operating
Procedures (SOP)
• Standardized and uniform emergency responder interaction during emergency response operations
• Standardized use and application of interoperable emergency communications terminology, solutions, and backup systems Technology
• Voice and data standards that pertain to real-time situational information exchange and reports for emergency responders before, during, and after response
• Uniform model and standard for emergency data information exchange
• Testing and evaluation of emergency communications
technology to help agencies make informed decisions about technology
• Emergency response communications technology based on voluntary consensus standards
• Basic level of communications systems operability
Training and Exercises
• Uniform, standardized performance objectives to measure effectiveness of emergency responders communications
capabilities
• Emergency response providers who are fully knowledgeable, trained, and exercised on the use and application of day-to-day and backup communications equipment, systems, and
operations irrespective of the extent of the emergency response Usage
• Adequate resources and planning to cover not only initial system and equipment investment but also the entire life cycle (operations, exercising, and maintenance)
• Broad regional (interstate and intrastate) coordination in technology investment and procurement planning
1758
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

9 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
9 3. Achieving the Future State of Emergency Communications This section describes the strategy for achieving the NECP’s future state for emergency communications and for meeting the overall goals identified in Section 2. Specifically, this section discusses in detail the seven Objectives that delineate a comprehensive assessment of the capabilities needed to close existing gaps and achieve the long-term vision. In the near- term, DHS will continue to work with its stakeholders on implementing the NECP initiatives and attaining near-term goals. As previously defined, the three critical elements of emergency communications are operability, interoperability, and continuity of communications. Progress toward achieving each of the seven objectives is essential in realizing improvements in all three of these primary elements of emergency communications.17 In addition, this section defines Supporting Initiatives for each objective, with a focus on driving outcomes toward the future state. Each initiative identifies current emergency communications activities and key gaps. To implement these initiatives, there are Recommended National Milestones to define the timelines and outcomes.

3.1 Objectives, Initiatives, and Milestones
The objectives and initiatives provide national guidance to Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies to implement key activities to improve emergency communications. Milestones provide key checkpoints to monitor NECP implementation. The proposed timelines for completing these initiatives began when the NECP was delivered to Congress on July 31, 2008. OEC will then coordinate development of implementation strategies with partner organizations at all levels of government, private sector organizations, and nongovernmental associations The NECP identifies the following objectives to improve emergency communications for Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency responders:

1. Formal decisionmaking structures and clearly defined leadership roles coordinate emergency communications capabilities.

2. Federal emergency communications programs and initiatives are collaborative across agencies and aligned to achieve national goals.

3. Emergency responders employ common planning and operational protocols to effectively use their resources and personnel.

4. Emerging technologies are integrated with current emergency communications capabilities through standards implementation, research and development, and testing and evaluation.

5. Emergency responders have shared approaches to training and exercises, improved technical expertise, and enhanced response capabilities.

6. All levels of government drive long-term advancements in emergency communications through integrated strategic planning procedures, appropriate resource allocations, and public-private partnerships.

7. The Nation has integrated preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery capabilities to communicate during significant events.
17 Note that no single objective is discretely linked to any one of the three elements (i.e., operability, interoperability, or continuity of communications). Rather, progress in any objective area will result in improvements in each of the three emergency communications components.
1759
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
10 Substantial cooperation and collaboration across the stakeholder community are necessary to achieve all of the milestones in each objective. The supporting initiatives and recommended national milestones represent the DHS’ position on actions that must occur and establish completion dates to meet NECP goals. DHS continues to work with stakeholders at all levels of government to identify and verify ownership roles to drive full participation and implementation of this Plan.

For some of the milestones, specific leadership and ownership roles are defined based on associated mission areas, current activities, existing authorities, and feedback from organizations during NECP development. In many cases, specific leadership roles to achieve the milestones are not and presently cannot be defined. Although DHS has been mandated by Congress to develop the NECP and coordinate its implementation, DHS has limited authority to compel responsibilities and leadership roles—and the associated expenditure of resources—for external organizations. To implement the NECP, OEC will collaborate with its partner organizations to develop strategies that guide achievement of the objectives, initiatives, and milestones. Exhibit 4 illustrates these integrated elements of the NECP and depicts: A vision of the future state and goals that support achievement of the vision; specific objectives to meet these goals; and supporting initiatives with national milestones that define the outcomes and timelines required.

Exhibit 4: The NECP Roadmap
1760
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

11 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
11 Objective 1: Formal Governance Structures and Clear Leadership Roles
Formal decision-making structures and clearly defined leadership roles coordinate emergency communications capabilities.

More than 50,000 independent agencies across the Nation routinely use emergency communications. Each of these agencies is governed by the laws of its respective jurisdiction or area of responsibility. No single entity is, or can be, in charge of the Nation’s entire emergency communications infrastructure. In such an environment, collaborative planning among all levels of government is critical for ensuring effective and fully coordinated preparedness and response. Formal governance structures and leadership are needed to manage these complex systems of people, organizations, and technologies.18
Current Emergency Communications Activities:19
• National-level policies identify roles, responsibilities, and coordinating structures for incident management (e.g., National Response Framework [NRF] and its Emergency Support Function #2 [ESF#2], National Incident Management System [NIMS] Joint Field Office Activation and Operations—Interagency Integrated Standard Operating Procedure Annex E).
• The Statewide Communication Interoperability Plan (SCIP) Guidebook provides guidance on establishing a structure for governing statewide communications interoperability planning efforts. All 56 States and territories now have SCIPs. • The ECPC establishes a governance and decision-making structure for strategic coordination of interdepartmental emergency communications at the Federal level.
• FEMA leads the integration of tactical Federal emergency communications during disasters and is developing requirements and an associated Disaster Emergency Communications (DEC) Integration Framework for fulfilling emergency communications needs during disasters.
• Decision-making bodies at the State, regional, and local levels coordinate emergency communications issues (e.g., RECCWG,statewide interoperability coordinators and executive committees, local communications committees).20 18 Most emergencies occur at the local level and are managed by local incident commanders. To best support the local incident commander, Federal and State agencies must ensure the coordination of their interoperability efforts with local agencies. This perspective is in agreement with the ERC’s guiding principles, SAFECOM Emergency Response Council, Agreements on a Nationwide Plan for Interoperable Communications, Summer 2007. 19 A subset of relevant and current emergency communication activities has been identified for each objective in the NECP; these subsets are not meant to be comprehensive, but represent examples of stakeholder input collected during NECP development. Many additional activities are planned and underway across all levels of government. 20 As defined in Section 1805 of the Department of Homeland Security Act of 2007, RECCWGs assess emergency communications capabilities within their respective regions, facilitate disaster preparedness through the promotion of multijurisdictional and multiagency emergency communications networks, and ensure activities are coordinated with all emergency communications stakeholders within the RECCWG’s associated FEMA region. The FEMA Regional Administrator oversees the RECCWG and its activities, and the RECCWG is required to report annually (at a minimum) to the FEMA Regional Administrator. The RECCWG advises on all aspects of emergency communications in its respective Region and incorporates input from emergency communications stakeholders and representatives from all levels of government as well as from nongovernmental and private sector agencies. 1761
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

12 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
12 • OEC is developing a governance sustainability and SCIP implementation methodology to provide guidance and share lessons learned in creating and sustaining effective statewide communications interoperability governance structures for SCIP implementation.

Key Gaps and Obstacles Driving Action:
• In many cases, emergency response agencies are unaware of (or have yet to adopt and integrate) national-level policies that define roles, responsibilities, and coordinating structures for emergency communications.
• State Interoperability Executive Committees (SIEC) or their equivalents do not have uniform structures, they typically act in an ad hoc capacity, and they often lack inclusive membership.
• The Nation does not have an objective, standardized framework to identify and assess emergency communications capabilities nationwide. Thus, it is difficult for jurisdictions to invest in building and maintaining appropriate levels of operability, interoperability, and continuity of communications. • Emergency communications strategic planning efforts vary in scope and often do not address the operability and interoperability concerns of all stakeholders. • Many agencies often do not consider communications planning to be a priority and therefore do not allocate resources for participation in planning activities. • There is a need for greater Federal department and agency participation in State, regional, and local governance and planning processes.
• Many States do not have full-time statewide interoperability coordinators, or equivalent positions, to focus on the activities needed to drive change.

Supporting Initiatives and Milestones to Address Key Gaps:
• Initiative 1.1: Facilitate the development of effective governance groups and designated emergency communications leadership roles. Uniform criteria and best practices for governance and emergency communications leadership across the Nation will better equip emergency response agencies to make informed decisions that meet the needs of their communities. Establishing effective leadership positions and representative governance groups nationwide will standardize decision-making and enhance the ability of emergency response agencies to share information and respond to incidents.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS will establish a central repository of model formal agreements (i.e., Memorandums of Agreement [MOA], Memorandums of Understanding [MOU], and Mission Assignments) and information that will enhance interstate and intrastate coordination.21
o Within 12 months, all States and territories should establish full-time statewide interoperability coordinators or equivalent positions. 21 This repository is envisioned as a component of the ECPC clearinghouse function. Please refer to Initiative 2.1 for additional information and activities regarding the ECPC clearinghouse. 1762
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

13 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
13 o Within 12 months, DHS will conduct a National Emergency Communications workshop to provide an opportunity for RECCWG participants, statewide emergency communications coordinators, and other interested parties to collaborate with one another and with Federal representatives from the ECPC and FPIC.
o Within 12 months, RECCWGs are fully established as a primary link for disaster emergency communications among all levels of government at the FEMA regional level, sharing information, identifying common problems, and coordinating multistate operable and interoperable emergency response initiatives and plans among Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies.22 o Within 12 months, SIECs (or their equivalents) in all 56 States and territories should incorporate the recommended membership as outlined in the SCIP Guidebook and should be established via legislation or executive order by an individual State’s governor.
o Within 18 months, DHS will publish uniform criteria and best practices for establishing governance groups and emergency communications leadership roles across the Nation.
• Initiative 1.2: Develop standardized emergency communications performance objectives and link to DHS’ overall system for assessing preparedness capabilities nationwide. DHS will collaborate with Federal, regional, State,23 local, and tribal governments and organizations, as well as with the private sector, to develop a more comprehensive and targeted set of evaluation criteria for defining and measuring communications requirements across the Nation. To prevent duplicative reporting requirements for its stakeholders, DHS will ensure these assessment efforts leverage existing reporting requirements (e.g., for SCIPs, Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans [TICPs], and State Preparedness Reports) and grant program applications (e.g., for the Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program [IECGP] and the Homeland Security Grant Program [HSGP]). Evaluation criteria will be based on the approach being followed in DHS’ implementation plans for the National Preparedness Guidelines/Target Capabilities List (TCL).24
22 FEMA organizes the United States into 10 FEMA regions. Each FEMA region has its own Regional Headquarters led by a Regional Administrator. FEMA regions are responsible for working in partnership with emergency management agencies from each state within the respective region to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. FEMA regions and their Regional Administrators will be leveraged to provide oversight, implementation, and execution for their respective RECCWGs. 23 This collaboration would include State homeland security advisors and statewide interoperability coordinators. 24 DHS is currently developing TCL implementation plans for animal health, EOC management, intelligence, onsite incident management, mass transit protection, and weapons of mass destruction (WMD)/hazardous material (hazmat) rescue and decontamination. Communication requirements will be based on the concepts and principles outlined in the NECP and in the baseline principles provided in the NIMS (e.g., common operating picture; interoperability; reliability, scalability and portability; and resiliency and redundancy). These requirements will be based on the command requirements for response-level emergency communications as defined in the NECP, and will also include the full range of communications requirements for all of the standardized types of communications (e.g., strategic, tactical, support, public address) identified in the NIMS. 1763
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
14 Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS will develop a standardized framework for identifying and assessing emergency communications capabilities nationwide.
o Within 18 months, DHS’ emergency communications capability framework, in preparation for release, will be reviewed during a series of technical working group meetings with stakeholders from the emergency response community.
o Within 24 months, the emergency communications capability framework will be incorporated as the communications and information management capability in the DHS/FEMA National Preparedness Guidelines/TCL, which will serve as a basis for future grant policies.
• Initiative 1.3: Integrate strategic and tactical emergency communications planning efforts across all levels of government. Tactical and strategic coordination will eliminate unnecessary duplication of effort and maximize interagency synchronization, bringing together tactical response and strategic planning.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS will make available an effective communicationsasset management tool containing security and privacy controls to allow for nationwide intergovernmental use.
o Within 12 months, tactical planning among Federal, State, local, and tribal governments occurs at the regional interstate level.
• Initiative 1.4: Develop coordinated grant policies that promote Federal participation and coordination in communications planning processes, governance bodies, joint training and exercises, and infrastructure sharing.

The largest investment category of DHS grant funds is interoperable communications. Federal acquisition, deployment, and operating funds supporting Federal mission-critical communication systems often cannot be used to support State and local communication needs (when otherwise appropriate).

These limitations on the use of these funds can inhibit the realization of the goals of coordination and interoperability, as systems are developed, deployed, and maintained.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS fiscal year (FY) 2009 grant policies provides guidance on how to best support national interoperability needs through the promotion of shared infrastructure, cooperative planning, and coordinated governance.
1764
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
15 o Within 12 months, best practices for sharing infrastructure, addressing spectrum issues, and developing agreements among Federal, State, and local emergency response communicators are promoted through DHS technical assistance programs, in accordance with applicable laws. 1765
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
16 Objective 2: Coordinated Federal Activities
Federal emergency communications programs and initiatives are collaborative across agencies and aligned to achieve national goals.

Federal departments and agencies rely on emergency communications capabilities to support mission-critical operations (e.g., law enforcement, disaster response, homeland security). Traditionally, individual Federal departments and agencies have not considered the benefits of planning and implementing emergency communications systems in conjunction with other Federal departments and agencies, or with State and local agencies. It is critical that Federal programs and initiatives—including grant programs—responsible for managing and providing emergency communications, are coordinated to minimize duplication, maximize Federal investments, and ensure interoperability.

Current Emergency Communications Activities:
• The ECPC has been established to serve as the Federal focal point for interoperable emergency communications. An ECPC clearinghouse is being designed as a central repository for Federal, State, local, and tribal governments to publish and share tactics, techniques, practices, programs, and policies that enhance interoperability for emergency communications.
• RECCWGs are being established to provide regional coordination points for emergency communications preparedness, response, and recovery for Federal, State, local, and tribal governments within each FEMA region. • Federal, State, and local agencies are both independently and jointly upgrading and modernizing their tactical communications systems. There are several Federal grant programs (e.g., the HSGP and the Public Safety Interoperable Communications [PSIC] Grant Program) that State, local, and tribal entities can use to enhance their emergency communications capabilities. • DHS is establishing the IECGP to support projects that focus on improving operable and interoperable emergency communications for State, local, and tribal agencies and for international border agencies. IECGP guidance is being developed to close gaps associated with governance, planning, training, and exercises and currently focuses grant funds on initiatives that are not focused on technology.
• OEC’s Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program (ICTAP) helps to enhance interoperable emergency communications among Federal, State, local, and tribal governments by providing assistance on governance, SOPs, technology, training and exercises, usage, and engineering issues. The ICTAP leverages and works with other Federal, State, and local interoperability efforts whenever possible to enhance the overall capacity for agencies and individuals to communicate with one another.
1766
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
17 Key Gaps and Obstacles Driving Action:
• Information on Federal emergency communications programs, activities, and standards is not consistently or adequately shared with State and local agencies. • Federal emergency responders are not integrated into existing State and local networks because of capacity, frequency coordination, and channel congestion issues.
• Federal grant programs for interoperable emergency communications are not targeting gaps in a consistent and coordinated manner.
• There is a lack of overall Federal coordination at the regional level and participation in regional UASI and statewide planning activities (e.g., SIEC). • Regulatory and legal issues act as barriers to the further use of shared capabilities across all levels of government.

Supporting Initiatives and Milestones to Address Key Gaps:
• Initiative 2.1: Establish a source of information about Federal emergency communications programs and initiatives. There are a number of Federal programs and initiatives focused on emergency communications. DHS will establish a focal point for coordinating intergovernmental emergency communications to help the Federal Government identify duplicative efforts and achieve greater economies of scale.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, Federal departments and agencies leverage the ECPC as the central coordinating body for providing Federal input into, and comments on, Federal emergency communications projects, plans, and reports.
o Within 12 months and annually thereafter, the ECPC submits a strategic assessment to Congress, detailing progress to date, the remaining obstacles to interoperable emergency communications, and Federal coordination efforts.
o Within 12 months, DHS establishes a uniform method for coordination and information sharing between ECPC and the RECCWGs.
o Within 18 months, the ECPC web-based clearinghouse portal commences operation, with strong consideration given to leveraging existing portals, such as the Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN), DHS ONE-Net, and DHS Interactive.
o Within 24 months, DHS establishes targeted outreach and training activities to ensure that stakeholders across the Nation are aware of the availability of ECPC clearinghouse resources.
• Initiative 2.2: Coordinate all technical assistance programs to provide greater consistency for the delivery of Federal services. Coordinated and uniform technical assistance will improve the reliability of communications 1767
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
18 systems and operator expertise. Technical assistance can be targeted to address gaps identified in SCIPs and the priorities outlined in the NECP.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 6 months, through the ECPC, a catalog of current technical assistance programs will be established, to both ensure the awareness of available technical assistance and reduce duplication.
o Within 6 months, DHS establishes a focal point for consistent and comprehensive technical assistance and guidance for emergency communications planning with Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies. o Within 12 months, Federal agencies establish a common methodology across all Federal operability and interoperability technical assistance programs and will train the personnel who provide technical assistance on the use of this methodology.
o Within 18 months, DHS establishes a consistent and coordinated method for States and localities to request Federal technical assistance. • Initiative 2.3: Target Federal emergency communications grants to address gaps identified in the NECP, SCIPs, and TICPs. Targeted Federal grants will allow emergency response agencies to address communications gaps and coordinate planning efforts. Federal grant funding represents only a small fraction of overall emergency response emergency communications investment.

Nonetheless, such funding is a key tool by which State and local emergency response agencies can address national emergency communication priorities.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, all IECGP investments are coordinated with the statewide interoperability coordinator and SIEC, or its equivalent, to support State administrative agency investments, including filling the gaps identified in the NECP and SCIPs.
o Within 12 months, DHS grant policies are developed to encourage regional operable and interoperable solutions, including shared solutions, and to prioritize cost-effective measures and multi-applicant investments. o Within 12 months, the ECPC stands up a working group to coordinate grant priorities across Federal grant programs.
• Initiative 2.4: Enable resource sharing and improve operational efficiencies.

Most government-owned wireless infrastructure that supports emergency response exists at the State and local levels. Further, many State and local agencies have modernized and expanded their systems through mechanisms such as Federal grant programs (e.g., the HSGP and the PSIC Grant Program), or they are currently in the process of doing so. By working with State and local agencies, Federal agencies can benefit from these improvements by leveraging both existing and planned infrastructure to improve operability and interoperability. In addition, there are a number of Federal-level programs and 1768
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
19 initiatives involving the deployment of communications infrastructure, which present opportunities for resource and infrastructure sharing (e.g., spectrum, Radio Frequency [RF] sites). Federal agencies should work to better understand existing and planned programs, initiatives, and infrastructure across all levels of government to improve coordination, maximize investments, and more quickly field capabilities.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 6 months, DHS conducts an assessment of shared regional/State systems to determine the potential for resource sharing among Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies.
o Within 12 months, DHS prioritizes sharing opportunities, based on Federal emergency communications requirements.
o Within 24 months, DHS establishes partnerships between Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies, as appropriate.
• Initiative 2.5: Establish interoperability capabilities and coordination between domestic and international partners. Emergencies occurring near the Mexican and Canadian borders frequently require a bi-national response, necessitating interoperability with international partners. These countries often have different technical configurations and regulatory statutes than the United States. Coordination is essential to ensure that domestic and international legal and regulatory requirements are followed.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 6 months, and annually thereafter, hold plenary meetings of the United States-Mexico Joint Commission on Resolution of Radio Interference to address identified interference cases between the United States and Mexico.
o Within 12 months, DHS establishes best practices for emergency communications coordination with international partners (i.e., cross border interoperability coordination with Mexico and Canada).
o Within 24 months, DHS establishes demonstration projects between Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies, and international partners, to improve interoperability in border areas that are at risk for large-scale incidents (natural or man-made) requiring international responses (including illegal border crossings or smuggling activities that result from an incident). 1769
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
20 Objective 3: Common Planning and Operational Protocols Emergency responders employ common planning and operational protocols to effectively use their resources and personnel.

Agencies often create SOPs to meet their unique emergency communications requirements. In recent years, with support from the Federal Government, emergency responders have developed standards for interoperability channel naming, the use of existing nationwide interoperability frequencies, and the use of plain language. NIMS represents an initial step in establishing national consistency for how agencies and jurisdictions define their operations; however, additional steps are required to continue streamlining response procedures.

Current Emergency Communications Activities:
• National-level preparedness and incident management doctrines (e.g., NRF, NIMS, Joint Field Office Activation and Operations Interagency Integrated Standard Operating Procedures, TCLs) are in various stages of development; these exist to define common principles, roles, structures, and target capabilities for incident response.
• Strategic and tactical interoperable emergency communications planning has begun at the State and local levels (e.g., TICPs, SCIPs, FEMA, State and regional emergency communications planning).
• Common nomenclature initiatives for interoperability channels (e.g., NPSTC Channel Naming Report) are underway.
• FEMA has developed a DEC Integration Framework and continues to support both government and nongovernmental organizations in developing plans and response frameworks and defining roles and responsibilities. • FEMA’s NIMS Integration Center is developing the National Emergency Responder Credentialing System (NERCS).
• Federal grant guidance (e.g., FY 2008 SAFECOM grant guidance; FY 2008 IECGP grant guidance) exists for migrating current radio practices to plain language standards.
• The Office for Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC), in coordination with OEC, is developing an SOP Development Guide, a Shared Channel Guide v2.0, and a brochure on plain language.
• DHS recently issued Federal Continuity Directive-1, which establishes continuity planning guidelines for Federal departments and agencies. • The Office of Science and Technology Policy issued the National Communications System Directive (NCSD) 3-10, Minimum Requirements for Continuity Communications Capabilities as planning direction for communications capabilities that support continuity of operations.

Key Gaps and Obstacles Driving Action:
• There are inconsistencies in the use of plain language, the interoperability channel naming conventions, the interoperability frequencies, and SOPs. 1770
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

21 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
21 • Nationwide adoption and usage of NIMS, NRF, and NERCS has been slow because some users are often unfamiliar with the direction and intent of these policies.
• Inconsistent use of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)-designated national interoperability channels has limited the effectiveness of this interoperability solution for emergency response communications systems operating in the same frequency band.

Supporting Initiatives and Milestones to Address Key Gaps:
• Initiative 3.1: Standardize and implement common operational protocols and procedures. A national adoption of plain-language radio practices and uniform common channel naming, along with the programming and use of existing national interoperability channels, will allow agencies across all disciplines to effectively share information on demand and in real time. Using common operational protocols and procedures avoids the confusion that using disparate coded language systems and various tactical interoperability frequencies can create. Use of the existing nationwide interoperability channels with common naming will immediately address interoperability requirements for agencies operating in the same frequency band.25
Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 6 months, OEC develops plain-language guidance in concert with State and local governments to address the unique needs of agencies/regions and disciplines across the Nation.
o Within 6 months, American National Standards Institute (ANSI) certifies, and emergency response accreditation organizations accept, the NPSTC Channel Naming Guide as the national standard for FCC-designated nationwide interoperability channels.
o Within 9 months, the National Integration Center’s (NIC) Incident Management Systems Integration Division (IMSID) promotes plainlanguage standards and associated guidance. o Within 12 months, grant policies for Federal programs that support emergency communications are coordinated, providing incentives for States to include plans to eliminate coded substitutions throughout the Incident Command System (ICS).
o Within 12 months, Federal agencies identify a uniform naming system for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s (NTIA) designated nationwide interoperability channels, and this naming system is integrated into the NPSTC Guide.
25 The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and members of the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC), with support from the FCC, revised the NTIA Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management. The NTIA amended the Conditions for Use and eliminated the requirement to establish an MOU between non-Federal and Federal entities on the use of the law enforcement (LE) and IR channels. However, the new conditions do require the non-Federal entity to obtain a license and include a point of contact in the license application it submits to the FCC for use of the LE/IR channels. 1771
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

22 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
22 o Within 18 months, DHS develops training and technical assistance programs for the National Interoperability Field Operations Guide (NIFOG);26 programs an appropriate set of frequency-band-specific nationwide interoperability channels into all existing emergency responder radios;27 and preprograms an appropriate set of frequency-band-specific nationwide interoperability channels into emergency response radios that are manufactured or purchased through Federal funding as a standard requirement.
o Within 24 months, all SCIPs reflect plans to eliminate coded substitutions throughout the ICS, and agencies incorporate the use of existing nationwide interoperability channels into SOPs, training, and exercises at the Federal, State, regional, local, and tribal levels.
• Initiative 3.2: Implementation of the NIMS and the NRF across all levels of government. Emergency response agencies across all levels of government should adopt and implement national-level policies and guidance to ensure a common approach to incident management and communications support.

Implementation of these policies will establish clearly defined communications roles and responsibilities and enable integration of all communications elements as the ICS structure expands from the incident level to the national level.

Recommended National Milestones:

o Within 12 months, all Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency response providers within UASI jurisdictions have implemented the Communications and Information Management section of the NIMS.
• Initiative 3.3: Develop and implement model SOPs for specified events and all-hazards response. SOPs address the range of informal and formal practices and procedures that guide emergency responder interactions and the use of interoperable emergency communications solutions. Agencies should develop, coordinate, and share best practices and procedures that encompass both operational and technical components. Command and control protocols should be NIMS-compliant and incorporate the ICS as an operational guide. Procedures for the activation, deployment, and deactivation of technical resources should be included, as well as roles and responsibilities for the operation, management, recovery, and continuity of equipment and infrastructure during an incident.

Agencies should identify procedures used to trigger and implement backup communications solutions if primary systems and solutions should become unavailable. As the scale of an incident expands, procedures for the integration of 26 NIFOG is a collection of technical reference material to be used by radio technicians who are responsible for the radios to be used and applied during disaster response. NIFOG includes information from the National Interoperability Frequency Guide (NIFG), instructions on the use of NIFG, and other reference material. NIFOG is formatted to be a pocket-sized guide that is easy for radio technicians to carry. 27 Milestones in this area refer to the programming of an “appropriate set” of interoperability channels. This language is used in recognition that most radios used by emergency responders do not have the capacity to hold all of the national interoperability channels in addition to their required operational channels. Some radio channels are discipline-specific and are inappropriate to program in radios of other disciplines. 1772
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
23 communications solutions become increasingly critical. Agencies must institute processes by which policies, practices, and procedures are regularly developed and reviewed for consistency across agencies.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 6 months, DHS identifies and refines model SOPs for tactical communications and develops associated SOP training for emergency responders.
o Within 12 months, DHS identifies and refines model SOPs for emergency communications during specific types of incidents and all-hazards response (beyond tactical communications).
o Within 18 months, DHS collaborates with partner emergency communications organizations to disseminate model SOPs and provides SOP training by mission type, incident type, and all-hazards response to emergency response agencies. DHS will provide these SOPs and training on a regional basis.
1773
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
24 Objective 4: Standards and Emerging Communication Technologies Emerging technologies are integrated with current emergency communications capabilities through standards implementation, research and development, and testing and evaluation.

The emergency response community recognizes that no single technological solution can address all emergency communications challenges or meet the needs of all agencies. The proprietary nature of many communications technologies creates an ongoing challenge to system connectivity and establishing interoperability among them. The presence of wireless data networks, Internet Protocol (IP)-based mobile communications devices, and location-based commercial services, however, are creating potential opportunities to enhance command and control and situational awareness. Accelerating the development of standards for existing and emerging technologies can address these technology challenges, and therefore improve communications during response operations for both routine and significant events.

Current Emergency Communications Activities:
• The Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO), the National Association of State Technology Directors (NASTD), and the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) are developing a set of communications standards—the Project 25 (P25) suite of standards—for digital LMR. This effort is being undertaken in cooperation with the emergency response community, the private sector, and the Federal Government. • The standards for two of the eight P25 interfaces have been developed. • OIC is establishing a P25 Compliance Assessment Program (CAP) to assess manufacturers’ equipment for compliance with P25 standards. • Major documents on Common Air Interface (CAI) standards have been completed and products that implement CAI standards are currently being fielded; other major P25 standards documents are rapidly being developed. • Standards for data exchange are in development to improve information-sharing capabilities among disparate emergency response software applications (e.g., Emergency Data Exchange Language [EDXL] standards including the Common Alerting Protocol, Distribution Element [DE], Hospital Availability Exchange [HAVE], Resource Messaging [RM], and the National Information Exchange Model [NIEM]).
• Broadband initiatives and standards development include the P25 Interface Committee’s (APIC) Broadband Task Group (BBTG), Project MESA, and the NPSTC Broadband Working Group.
• Research and development (R&D) and testing and evaluation initiatives are driven by OIC (e.g., Voice over Internet Protocol [VoIP], Vocoder Testing, Multi-Band Radio, and Radio over Wireless Broadband [ROW-B]) and by the Department of Defense (DoD) (e.g., Joint Tactical Radio System [JTRS] and Joint Interoperability Test Command).
• The President’s Spectrum Policy Initiative focuses on identifying methods that use emerging technologies, such as cognitive radio, to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of spectrum usage.
1774
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
25 • Several States (e.g., Arizona, California, and Texas) are developing statewide “systems of systems” that leverage emerging technologies to establish interoperability among different levels of government and span frequency bands. • FEMA, following its DEC Integration Framework end-state architecture, is developing standardized deployable emergency communications capabilities that provide scalable and flexible voice, video, and data services. • In the ongoing FCC rulemaking proceeding to establish a nationwide broadband emergency response network in the 700 Megahertz (MHz) band, OEC is coordinating with Federal emergency response agencies through the FPIC to ensure that such agencies have access to this broadband network and that Federal interests are represented in network-sharing negotiations with emergency response and commercial licensees.
• The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) CommTech Program, with support from OIC, is funding R&D in the areas of cognitive and software-defined radio (SDR) and is providing input to the SDR forum to ensure emergency response needs are met by these technologies.
• DHS’ Science and Technology Directorate’s Command, Control, and Interoperability Division is leading a Common Operating Picture R&D program. • DOJ and other Federal entities are funding pilot projects to support State, local, and tribal emergency services activities.

Key Gaps and Obstacles Driving Action:
• Personnel responsible for designing or procuring communications systems are sometimes unaware of the status of communications standards. • The number and diversity of emergency response agencies that are procuring systems increases the complexity and difficulty of developing technologies to meet these user requirements.
• Standards development is hindered by the diverse requirements of independent emergency response organizations and agencies.
• Secure communications interoperability across Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency communications systems are often hindered by the Federal sector’s use of encryption.
• There is insufficient information about testing and assessing emergency response technologies, which makes it difficult for emergency response agencies to make informed procurement decisions about technology for use both now and in the future.
• State and local government agencies do not consistently participate in standardsmaking bodies and development processes. • A common view of existing incident conditions and resources is not readily available or easily shared across Federal, State, and local jurisdictions in a way that improves the understanding of the emergency or event Supporting Initiatives and Milestones to Address Key Gaps:
• Initiative 4.1: Adopt voluntary consensus standards for voice and data emergency response capabilities. Voluntary consensus standards will enable 1775
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
26 agencies to make informed procurement decisions and to benefit from emerging technologies. Compliance assessment programs provide a documented certification process for communications equipment and programs.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 6 months, a P25 CAP is established to test equipment for compliance with approved interfaces.
o Within 6 months, a specifications profile for VoIP is published and tested using multiple manufacturers’ equipment.
o Within 12 months, DHS publishes the P25 CAP Summary Test Reports and manufacturers’ Supplier’s Declaration of Compliance (SDoC) for equipment.
o Within 18 months, DHS makes standards and compliance information available to emergency response agencies to help inform their communications equipment purchases (e.g., the Authorized Equipment List [AEL] and the Standardized Equipment List [SEL]).
o Within 18 months, DHS establishes compliance strategies for non-land mobile radio emergency communications technologies.
o Within 24 months, develop standards for the exchange of real-time situational information for emergency responders before, during, and after an incident.
o Within 36 months, develop voluntary consensus standards for emergency communications data file structures and messaging formats. • Initiative 4.2: Research, develop, test, and evaluate new voice, video, and data solutions for emergency communications, based on user-driven needs and requirements. Used in conjunction with legacy systems, new technologies have the potential to eliminate current technological challenges such as a lack of available frequencies and the use of multiple frequency bands. Aggregating the demands of emergency response agencies during the development of requirements for these emerging technologies will increase the effectiveness of the private sector in developing standardized products and services.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 3 months, DHS develops a process for emergency response agencies to collaborate with the private sector to aggregate user requirements. o Within 9 months, emergency response agencies identify and prioritize nearterm (3–5 years) requirements. o Within 24 months, emergency response agencies develop, with the cooperation of private sector and other stakeholders, quality-of-service parameters for the most important near-term requirements. • Initiative 4.3: Transition to and/or integrate legacy systems with nextgeneration technologies based on voluntary consensus standards.

Transitioning to next-generation technologies may offer emergency response 1776
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
27 agencies easier-to-use and more functional capabilities, depending on their individual needs. The upcoming FCC narrowbanding deadline calls for nonFederal emergency response agencies operating in frequencies below 512 MHz to transition from 25 kilohertz (kHz) to 12.5 kHz channels by 2013 to ensure spectrum efficiency. Federal grants can facilitate the migration and transition from legacy to approved open architecture and next-generation systems.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, Federal grant policies are developed to encourage the migration to approved interoperable next generation systems. o Within 12 months, DHS publishes the results of pilots and evaluations of emerging technologies making this information available to emergency response agencies and the private sector to support their migration planning, standards development, and product development efforts. o Within 12 months, DHS publishes information and materials that highlight system migration best practices, lessons learned, and the benefits of new system capabilities.
• Initiative 4.4: Implement the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) for Federal responders. A standard nationwide encryption method will diminish the interoperability challenges faced by Federal responders (who previously used different methods) and will provide guidance to local and State agencies when working with Federal agencies.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 18 months, achieve encrypted interoperability between Federal departments and agencies using the AES.
o Within 18 months, publish a uniform standard for the AES for State, local, and tribal emergency responders who decide to use encryption. o Within 24 months, Federal grant policies are modified to accommodate an AES-encrypted feature for radio equipment used by State, local, and tribal emergency responders.
1777
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
28 Objective 5: Emergency Responder Skills and Capabilities Emergency responders have shared approaches to training and exercises, improved technical expertise, and enhanced response capabilties.

Training and exercises play a vital role in preparedness, readiness, and proficiency in accessing and using communications capabilities during emergency events. Preparedness is essential to ensuring that interoperable emergency communications equipment is well maintained, operational, and ready for deployment. Achieving appropriate levels of readiness and proficiency ensures that personnel can deploy, set up, and use equipment effectively, both on their own and in conjunction with other emergency responders.

Conducting training and exercises helps emergency responders understand their roles and be properly prepared to respond to a wide range of emergency events.

Current Emergency Communications Activities:
• Many State and local agencies have adopted NIMS training requirements, which are measured by Federal standards (e.g., NIMS 5-Year Training Plan). • Incident Type III Communications Unit Leader (COML) training, which standardizes the emergency communications component of incident management, has been finalized. An awareness course that is intended to provide basic-level, communications-specific training to other command unit leaders, is under development.
• There are existing standards and guidelines for national preparedness exercises that help standardize and measure exercise efficiency (e.g., the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program [HSEEP]).
• Large-scale preparedness exercises (e.g., Top Official [TOPOFF]) are being conducted with participants across levels of government, in addition to some communications-specific exercises (e.g., UASI TICP exercises); additional annual exercises are generally conducted at the State and local levels. • OEC is developing a planned events methodology to help emergency response officials design and execute interoperable communications plans for planned events.
• OEC is developing a Table Top Exercise Methodology as a training aid to reinforce interoperability practices and procedures for emergency responders.

Key Gaps and Obstacles Driving Action:
• Some emergency response agencies have not yet received NIMS training or have not adopted NIMS policies.
• A national standard for Type III COML training and certification has been developed, but has not yet been rolled out nationwide.
• A training curriculum for Communications Unit Technicians (COMT), Radio Operators (RADO), and other communications-unit positions has not yet been developed.
• Many emergency response agencies have only a limited number of qualified technical staff available to support daily operations and provide surge support for emergency communications.
1778
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
29 • Private sector partners have not been consistently involved in training and exercises.
• There are insufficient communications-specific training courses and field exercises available to emergency responders, and there is a lack of coordination with the private sector on training and exercises.

Supporting Initiatives and Milestones to Address Key Gaps:
• Initiative 5.1: Develop and implement national training programs and certification processes. Standardized training programs should be established to deliver regular training to all emergency responders who use or manage communications resources. To build knowledge and competency throughout the emergency response community, this training should be conducted within agencies, across disciplines, jurisdictions, and levels of government, and with key private sector organizations. Training programs should be sufficiently comprehensive to address small-scale to large-scale events and to build the capability for coordinating with a full range of emergency response providers during all-hazards scenarios. Specific programs should include training for COMLs, COMTs, and the Federal Emergency Communications Coordinators (FECC). These programs should be evaluated regularly to determine their effectiveness and their impact on performance and proficiency levels, and to ensure that the programs’ existing content remains valid, incorporating new content as needed.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS establishes national-level training programs and certification processes for COML, COMT, and FECC personnel. o Within 12 months, DHS finalizes and publishes ICS Communications Unit resource definitions (personnel and equipment).
o Within 12 months, DHS develops a nationwide interoperability channel usage guide and ensures that shared channel training curriculum and courseware are available.
o Within 18 months, DHS develops and uses standardized training and credentialing for COML and other ICS Communications Unit positions across the Nation.
o Within 18 months, DHS establishes a certification process for other emergency communications users and providers, including COMT, dispatchers, and emergency response providers.
• Initiative 5.2: Develop and inject standardized emergency communications performance objectives and evaluation criteria into operational exercises.

Incorporating standardized objectives and evaluation criteria into exercise programs will ensure the consistent evaluation of communications performance.

By evaluating communications as part of operational exercises, leadership will gain enhanced awareness and understanding of communications gaps. This understanding will ensure communications needs are prioritized appropriately. 1779
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
30 Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS establishes standardized exercise evaluation criteria based on the emergency communications performance objectives established in the DHS/FEMA Communications and Information Management Capability Framework.
o Within 18 months, the exercise evaluation criteria are reviewed in preparation for release through technical working group meetings with stakeholders from the emergency response exercise community. o Within 24 months, the emergency communications criteria are incorporated into the Exercise Evaluation Guides of the DHS/FEMA HSEEP. • Initiative 5.3: Provide targeted training to improve skills and capabilities of technical staff. Although most technicians receive formal communications training at the start of their careers as well as informal on-the-job training, ongoing or refresher training is not commonly provided, in part because there are not enough qualified subject matter experts. Communications technicians typically are too burdened with daily operations and maintenance activities to engage in formal training campaigns. As a result, users who do not rely on communications equipment for their daily missions might be unfamiliar with the equipment and procedures for its use. Developing training programs for technical staff will increase the number and enhance the expertise of technical and operational resources.

Recommended National Milestones:

o Within 12 months, DHS develops and disseminates training program guidance and curricula for emergency communications technical staff. o Within 18 months, DHS provides educational and training opportunities to emergency response agencies per requests through technical assistance programs.
1780
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

31 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
31 28 The Interoperability Business Case is available on the SAFECOM website at:
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/library/grant/1336_interoperabilitybusiness.htm Objective 6: System Life-Cycle Planning
All levels of government drive long-term advancements in emergency communications through integrated strategic planning procedures, appropriate resource allocations, and public-private partnerships.

Emergency response providers must upgrade and regularly maintain communications systems and capabilities to ensure effective operation; Federal grants can help meet these needs. However, initial capital investments in capabilities, enabled by grants, often are not accompanied by a plan for long-term sustainability. Grants should allow for expanded support of system upgrades, governance, planning, policies and procedures, and training and exercises. Federal agencies face a similar challenge in identifying sustainable funding mechanisms to upgrade and maintain communications systems.

Public and private sector partners have their own core competencies and, thus, increased collaboration will add long-term value to emergency communications.

Current Emergency Communications Activities:
• OEC and OIC published an Interoperability Business Case to help emergency response officials develop a compelling business case for funding ongoing local interoperability efforts.28
Key Gaps and Obstacles Driving Action:
• Emergency communications are not viewed as a priority by many agencies; thus, resources are not allocated for participation in planning activities. • Communications planning is not viewed as a priority by many agencies. DHS is working to ensure that limited Federal resources are targeted and expended more strategically on identified gaps, while maintaining adequate State and local flexibility.
• Many jurisdictions still pursue a short-term, technology-centric approach to solving emergency communications problems, but without addressing comprehensive planning for the equally important governance mechanisms, SOPs, and regular training and exercises.
• Procurement decisions are often made without consulting neighboring jurisdictions or agencies.

Supporting Initiatives and Milestones to Address Key Gaps:
• Initiative 6.1: Conduct system life-cycle planning to better forecast longterm funding requirements. Providing planning and business case best practices through technical assistance will enable leadership to project the true cost of sustaining the organization’s communications system and allow budgeting for maintenance and eventual replacement. Grant funding investment justifications from States and spending within the Federal Government should be 1781
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

32 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
32 prioritized to support cooperative, regional (intrastate and interstate) system planning efforts.

Recommended National Milestones:

o Within 12 months, DHS will revise current guidance documents that specify best practices for achieving basic operable communications while planning for interoperability.
o Within 18 months, DHS will collect and share best practices to help emergency response agencies identify emergency communications system life-cycle benchmarks to enhance long-term cost planning and budgeting. o Within 24 months, Federal grant programs will require system life-cycle plans for all communications systems purchased with Federal grant dollars. • Initiative 6.2: Expand the use of public and private sector partnerships related to emergency communications. Although the private sector owns more than 85 percent of critical infrastructure, government and emergency response agencies own and operate communications systems that support their critical missions, including defense, law enforcement, and emergency response.29 The private sector’s capabilities include fixed, mobile, and rapidly deployable networks, assets, and facilities that can help ensure the success of emergency communications. A more comprehensive understanding of the specific service offerings and capabilities of private sector organizations will enable emergency response agencies to better leverage existing and future communications capabilities.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS convenes a summit of emergency responders and private sector representatives to identify and make recommendations on additional public-private sector partnerships to improve emergency communications.
• Initiative 6.3: Assess existing Federal mission-critical wireless capabilities and upgrade and modernize them according to mission needs. In many areas, Federal departments and agencies are still working to achieve the basic operability to achieve their missions. Federal agencies require high-quality, secure, and reliable communications systems to support their mission-critical operations. Whether facing a natural disaster or other emergency, tactical communications can enable Federal emergency responders to perform their jobs, ultimately protecting against the loss of life and property. Federal agencies must develop and implement strategies to meet modernization mandates and upgrade their infrastructures to attain resilient communications systems. 29 The National Infrastructure Protection Plan: Communications Sector-Specific Plan, p. 11. 1782
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
33 Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 6 months, all Federal departments and agencies assess existing communications capabilities and compare them with the capabilities needed to complete their missions.
o Within 12 months, all Federal agencies determine priorities, plan budgets and schedules, and design required upgrades to mission-critical subscriber and infrastructure equipment.
• Initiative 6.4: Enhance emergency communications system survivability using redundant and resilient system designs. Disasters can adversely affect the performance of the communications systems that agencies use for emergency response. Emergency response agencies must identify the types of incidents that can disrupt the communications system components (e.g., radio repeaters, backhaul circuits, and power systems) and develop plans to enhance survivability.

Implementing redundant infrastructure, developing resilience strategies, defining recovery time objectives, and exercising communications continuity plans will improve communications system survivability.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS will coordinate with RECCWGs to conduct impact analyses of communications systems to identify the impact from the affects of the disaster and disruption scenarios analyzed.
o Within 18 months, DHS will coordinate with RECCWGs to ensure that all Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency response providers have developed and implemented communications continuity plans for maintaining or recovering and stabilizing operations during and following disaster events.
o Within 24 months, DHS will coordinate with RECCWGs to ensure that all Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency response providers have coordinated communications continuity exercises and established crisis communications procedures and policies.
1783
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
34 Objective 7: Disaster Communications Capabilities
The Nation has integrated preparedness, mitigation, and response and recovery capabilities to communicate during significant events.

Significant incidents require maximum emergency response coordination. Emergency response is made more complex because such incidents often damage the communications infrastructure. To adequately react to the destruction or disruption of communications capabilities, agencies must proactively develop continuity plans, preposition the placement and delivery of deployable communications assets and resources, and participate in training and exercise programs that include disaster communicationsresponse scenarios. Appendix 3 provides an overview of Federal emergency response agencies and their programs, systems, and services.

Current Emergency Communications Activities:
• The Mobile Emergency Response Support (MERS) component of the FEMA DEC describes DHS’ primary rapid and deployable emergency communications capability in support of Federal, State, and local responders for the first 96 hours following an incident.
• Since 2006, the FEMA DEC has been working with individual States and territories to identify potential communications gaps during responses and to mitigate the gaps by pre-planning response packages tailored for each State.

FEMA plans to complete 23 State and territory DEC Annexes by 2008. • The Joint Network Nodes (JNN) is the bridge between the Warfighter Information Network–Tactical (WIN-T), a high-capacity network system that enables units and command centers to communicate while on the move, and the Army’s 30-year-old legacy voice communications system, Mobile Subscriber Equipment. • The National Guard Bureau (NGB) has deployed the Joint Incident Site Communications Capability (JISCC) in 56 States and territories, a transit case-based system that includes satellite reach-back communications, incident site communications, interoperability gateway communications, and command post integration and support equipment.
• The PSIC Grant Program funded $75 million in Strategic Technology Reserves (STR) for States and territories. Investments were made in deployable assets, radio caches, infrastructure enhancements, and satellite technology. • Some State, local, and tribal agencies are developing statewide communications systems and shared systems to expand capabilities.
• Emergency response providers are enhancing communications continuity plans (e.g., backup and mobile/deployable solutions, and strategic technology reserves). • Federal priority communications services and reporting systems are available for priority access and telecommunications system restoration and recovery (e.g., Government Emergency Telecommunications Service [GETS], Telecommunications Service Priority [TSP], Wireless Priority Service [WPS], and Disaster Information Reporting System [DIRS]).
• Established in 2002, the U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) provides Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) for domestic emergencies, both 1784
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

35 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
35 natural and man-made, and provides command and control of DoD personnel and DoD agency and component resources.30
Key Gaps and Obstacles Driving Action:
• The emergency response community needs to become better informed about Federal agencies’ strategic, policy, and operational capabilities for emergency communications.
• There is no integration framework that describes disaster communications services, the community of agencies and companies that provide these services, and the procedures for integrating these services and communities. • Communications planning activities related to disasters that may overwhelm or destroy communications systems are limited.
• There are multiple deployable and disaster communications asset data sets, but there is no comprehensive and accurate data set that could be used to integrate communications during a disaster.
• There is a need for disaster emergency communications technical standards to ensure uniform interoperability in terms of design specifications, methods of systems employment, processes, and/or operating practices. Some standards are mandatory and some are voluntary.
• Many agencies have a limited ability to identify replacement equipment and operations and maintenance funding to ensure the basic operability of their primary tactical systems.
• The ability to communicate across agencies and jurisdictions is limited by the fragmented nature of spectrum and by the requirement to operate on noncontiguous bands.
• Neither emergency response agencies nor commercial communications providers have standardized means for identifying individuals authorized to access and receive information about the disaster area.
• Few agencies conduct communications infrastructure threat and vulnerability assessments of their critical communications assets as part of their emergency communications planning activities.
• Many emergency response agencies are unaware of the priority services available from the Federal Government during emergencies.
• Many States do not have MOUs or frequency agreements with NGB to guide the use of the JISCC system.

Priority Initiatives and Milestones to Address Key Gaps:
• Initiative 7.1: Provide an integration framework for disaster communications operations and response to ensure that the Federal Government can effectively fulfill requests during incident response.

Although disaster communications capabilities are owned by many agencies and private sector entities, there is currently a limited understanding of how these capabilities would be integrated during operations. Following Hurricane Katrina, 30 Government Accountability Office (GAO), Report to Congressional Requesters: Homeland Defense, April 2008. 1785
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
36 deployable assets were in use across the operations areas, but there was limited coordination. In addition, a common operating picture was not available to senior leaders across government.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 6 months, DHS develops Disaster Tactical Communications Requirements Analysis to assess Federal, State, and local disaster emergency communications functional support areas (e.g., restoration, mission operations/team support, facility, tactical, and planning and coordination).
o Within 12 months, based on the Disaster Tactical Communications Requirements Analysis, DHS develops an Integration Framework and Concept of Operations (CONOPS) describing how disaster
communications requirements are filled and integrated at the national, regional, and incident levels.
o Within 24 months, DHS establishes the capability to track and monitor Federal assets during a response scenario.
• Initiative 7.2: Implement disaster communications planning and preparedness activities. Identifying critical communications vulnerabilities and developing mitigation strategies is important for all agencies with operational responsibilities during significant incidents. Agencies should evaluate the readiness posture of communications centers (e.g., Public Safety Answering Points [PSAP]) and emergency response and commercial networks that may be vulnerable to weather damage, flooding, and man-made disasters. The vulnerabilities identified should be a primary focus of disaster planning and preparedness activities. System planning activities should account for the availability of alternative and backup communications solutions, and resilient and diverse pathways to support communications if primary capabilities become unavailable.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, RECCWGs will work with State and local agencies to assess priority State vulnerabilities that, absent mitigation, could jeopardize command and control capabilities and critical mission operations.
o Within 12 months, DHS develops and publishes best practices and methodologies that promote the incorporation of vulnerability assessments into the emergency communications planning process.
o Within 24 months, develop plans and procedures to enhance emergency 911 systems and PSAP communications.
o Within 24 months, complete disaster communications training and exercises for all 56 States and territories.
1786
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
37 o Within 24 months, all Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies in UASIs will have defined alternate/backup capabilities in emergency communications plans.
• Initiative 7.3: Leverage existing and emerging technologies to expand and integrate disaster communications capabilities among emergency response providers. Deployable communications technologies can provide robust voice, video, and data capabilities for agencies during disasters. Packaging these capabilities to be quickly deployable and easily integrated and interoperable is a significant challenge. DHS will work across the government and the private sector to enable more effective pre-positioning and integration of existing and cuttingedge technologies.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, using the results of the Disaster Tactical Communications Requirements Analysis, DHS identifies a list of technologies that meets the majority of requirements identified. o Within 18 months, DHS provides a Disaster Communications Capability List to be included in the AEL and the SEL that provides an overview of approved interoperable or standardized equipment that should be used during response.
o Within 24 months, DHS will reassess its pre-positioning framework to evaluate whether it best meets national disaster communications needs.

• Initiative 7.4: Accelerate the implementation of emergency communications components in the NRF, specifically, national access and credentialing. NRF establishes a comprehensive, national, all-hazards approach to domestic incident response and is used broadly in an operational context for incident management activities related to pre-incident prevention and post-incident response and recovery. The Joint Field Office (JFO) DEC Branch coordinates Federal communications support to response efforts during incidents requiring a Federal response. The JFO DEC Branch also coordinates communications support to Federal, State, local, and tribal governments and emergency responders when their systems have been impacted and provides communications and information technology support to the JFO and its field teams. Comprehensive use of NRF will ensure consistent operations across the Nation and will reduce the risk of miscommunication among emergency response agencies. Ensuring suitable credentialing for all responders who require access to an incident site is another factor that is critical to rapid and effective response and recovery. Depending on the extent and impact of the incident, those who require access and credentials may include Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency responders, as well as NGO and private sector telecommunications infrastructure provider response personnel.
1787
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
38 Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 24 months, DHS develops national access and credentialing guidelines that offer emergency responders, including critical commercial communications providers, a means of identifying individuals eligible to access and receive information about the disaster area. • Initiative 7.5: Implement systems and procedures that ensure the Federal Government’s ability to establish situational awareness, develop a common operating picture, and provide timely and consistent information during crises. The collection and dissemination of information in preparation for and during an incident is essential to mitigate threats and to respond efficiently.

Situational awareness includes predicting the occurrence of a natural disaster or an attack; knowing the extent of damage that results from an event; having an operating picture that includes the status of response activities, critical infrastructures, and public health; and understanding plans for response and restoration. Situational awareness processes and activities reduce barriers to information sharing.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 12 months, DHS establishes a plan for an integrated asset tracking system to enable information sharing across the national, regional, and incident levels.
• Initiative 7.6: Promote the use of priority services programs and expand their capabilities (e.g., GETS, WPS, and TSP) to next-generation networks.

Priority access services are critical to the ability of emergency responders to access telecommunications resources during an incident. Significant incidents create high demand for telecommunications resources by emergency responders and the public. It is critical that emergency response providers have access to telecommunications resources when needed to enable information exchange.

Currently, the National Communications System sponsors several priority access services (e.g., GETS, TSP, and WPS) that are available for use by Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies. Based on mission requirements, agencies across various levels of government should leverage these services to ensure access to telecommunications resources when needed. In addition, planning is needed to ensure the availability of these services as networks transition to next-generation technologies.

Recommended National Milestones:
o Within 18 months, OEC will work with statewide coordinators to promote the availability and use of priority access services throughout their States or territories.
o Within 24 months, DHS establishes plans to transition priority access services to next-generation networks.
1788
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
39 4. Implementing and Measuring NECP Achievement
The success of the NECP requires the commitment of all emergency response disciplines at all levels of government. Achieving its goals and priority objectives will require coordination across geographical, political, and cultural jurisdictions and boundaries.

Therefore, this Plan provides strategic direction and guidance that Congress, Federal departments and agencies, State, local, and tribal government officials, and the private sector can use to identify future actions to address communications deficiencies.

4.1 Implementation
OEC, within DHS’ National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), is designated as the primary Federal agent charged with overseeing NECP implementation. In this role, OEC will monitor achievement of the NECP’s recommended milestones and initiatives and will coordinate with its stakeholders to assess progress in reaching this Plan’s goals. OEC’s current options for motivating emergency response agencies to implement the NECP include providing technical assistance to State, regional, local, and tribal government officials; developing grant policies and coordinating DHSadministered grant programs (e.g., IECGP); and coordinating Federal activities through the ECPC and FPIC. In addition, OEC will use statutory reporting requirements to monitor and report on progress towards implementing the NECP (e.g., State annual reports under the IECGP, RECCWG annual reports, ECPC annual strategic assessment, and OEC’s assessment and biennial progress reports).

Within the first year of the NECP implementation, OEC will partner with key stakeholders to determine valid metrics for the objectives and initiatives. OEC will provide a status report in its Biennial Progress Report to Congress, due February 2010.

Implementation of the NECP will be a coordinated effort among all levels of government including those listed below.

Executive and Legislative Branches—The NECP will provide the legislative and executive branches with recommended initiatives and national milestones that will inform them of emergency communications priorities, activities, and resource allocations for consideration and action.

Federal Agencies—The NECP documents the challenges of coordinating emergency communications efforts at the Federal level. Federal responders must also be able to work with State and local responders during an emergency. Two key Federal partnerships will be used to implement the NECP. Through the ECPC, Federal implementation of the NECP will be a collaborative effort, offering all stakeholders a better understanding of the achievements at this level. Through FPIC, Federal response organizations will work with State and local agencies and governments to improve communications and resource sharing.

State, Local, and Tribal Governments—The NECP provides guidance for improved emergency communications to State, local, and tribal agencies and governments to better focus Federal funding dollars and provides a forum for regional planning and participation. State, local, and tribal governments should strive to align with the NECP and implement key initiatives.
1789
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
40 Private Sector—The NECP identifies private sector support to communications during emergencies and recovery efforts and provides consistent direction for private sector involvement in standards development, advanced communications technologies, and services development and deployment.

4.2 Metrics
DHS will use future versions of the following reports and assessments to help assess progress toward achieving NECP goals:
o ECPC Annual Strategic Assessment
o RECCWG Annual Report
o OEC’s Biennial Progress Report
o OEC’s National Communications Capabilities Report.

Through OEC and the FEMA RECCWGs, DHS will collaborate with State homeland security advisors and statewide interoperability coordinators to develop valid methodologies for measuring progress toward these goals.

4.3 Future Requirements
As reflected in Initiatives 1.2 and 5.2, DHS will collaborate with Federal, State, regional, and local governments and the private sector to develop a more comprehensive and targeted set of evaluation criteria for defining, measuring, and assessing communications requirements across the Nation. To prevent duplicative reporting requirements for stakeholders, assessment efforts will leverage existing reporting requirements (e.g., SCIPs, TICP, and State preparedness reports) and grant program applications (e.g., IECGP and HSGP). Evaluation criteria will be consistent with DHS implementation of the National Preparedness Guidelines and the TCL.
1790
41 National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

V. Conclusion
Ultimately, the NECP’s goals cannot be achieved without the support, dedication, and commitment of the stakeholders who have been involved in developing this Plan. The Federal, State, local, tribal, and private sectors must work together and support each other to achieve nationwide operability, interoperability, and continuity of emergency communications. The NECP provides stakeholders with a shared strategy to mitigate the unique challenges that effective communication presents. By taking the NECP to action, this diverse community can truly achieve a unified vision that allows emergency responders to communicate as needed, on demand, and as authorized, at all levels of government and across all disciplines.
1791
A – 1
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
NECP Appendices
Appendix 1: NECP Legislative Requirements Compliance Matrix Appendix 2: Alignment with National Strategies, Planning Initiatives, and Key Authorities
Appendix 3: Key Federal Emergency Communications Initiatives, Programs, Systems, and Services
Appendix 4: DHS Organizations with Responsibilities and Programs Supporting Emergency Communications
Appendix 5: The SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum
Appendix 6: NECP Stakeholder Coordination
Appendix 7: NECP Source Documents
Appendix 8: Glossary of Terms
Appendix 9: Acronyms
1792
A – 2
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

Appendix 1: NECP Legislative Requirements Compliance
Exhibit A1-1 is a matrix that maps the National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP) to the Title XVIII legislative requirements.

Exhibit A1-1: Matrix of Title XVIII Legislative Requirements with NECP Sections No. Title XVIII Legislative Requirements NECP Section(s) 1 Include recommendations developed in consultation with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for a process for expediting national voluntary consensus standards for interoperable emergency communications equipment
Section 3 –
Objective 4: Standards &
Emerging Technologies
2 Identify the appropriate capabilities necessary for emergency response providers and relevant government officials to continue to communicate in the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters
Section 2.3 –
Capabilities Needed
3 Identify the appropriate interoperable emergency communications capabilities necessary for Federal, State, local, and tribal governments in the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters
Section 2.3 –
Capabilities Needed
4 Recommend both short-term and long-term solutions for ensuring that emergency response providers and relevant government officials can continue to communicate in the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters Section 3 –
Initiatives and Milestones
for Objectives 2, 3, 5, 7
5 Recommend both short-term and long-term solutions for deploying interoperable emergency communications systems for Federal, State, local, and tribal governments throughout the Nation, including through the provision of existing and emerging technologies Section 3 –
Initiatives and Milestones
for Objectives 3, 4, 5, 6
6 Identify how Federal departments and agencies that respond to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters can work effectively with State, local, and tribal governments in all States, and with other entities
Section 3 –
Objectives 1, 2, 7
7 Identify obstacles to deploying interoperable emergency communications capabilities nationwide and recommend short-term and long-term measures to overcome those obstacles, including recommendations for multi-jurisdictional coordination among Federal, State, local, and tribal governments
Section 3 –
For all objectives, see “Key
Gaps Driving Action” for
obstacles and relevant
“Initiatives” for
recommendations
8 Recommend goals and time frames for the deployment of emergency, command-level communications systems and develop a timetable for the deployment of interoperable emergency communications systems nationwide
• Section 2.2 – Goals
• Section 3 – Relevant
Initiatives and Milestones
for all Objectives
9 Recommend appropriate measures that emergency response providers should employ to ensure continued operation of relevant governmental communications infrastructure Section 3 –
Initiatives 4.2, 4.3, 6.2, 6.4,

7.2, 7.3
1031 (HR 1) Set a date, including interim benchmarks, by which State, local, and tribal governments, and Federal agencies expect to achieve a baseline level of national interoperable communications
Section 2.2 – Goals
31 This NECP requirement was added by H.R. 1, Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-53), which was signed into law August 3, 2007.
1793
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
A – 3
Appendix 2: Alignment with National Strategies, Planning Initiatives, and Key Authorities
The NECP has been designed to complement and support overarching homeland security and emergency communications legislation, strategies, and initiatives. The NECP applies guidance from these authorities, including key principles and priorities, to establish the first national strategic plan focused exclusively on improving emergency communications for emergency response providers nationwide. Moreover, the NECP provides a critical link between national communications priorities and strategic and tactical planning at the regional, State, and local levels. Exhibit A2-1 illustrates the linkage between the NECP and primary emergency communications authorities.

Exhibit A2-1: Key Homeland Security and Emergency Communications Authorities

NATIONAL NATIONAL

LEGISLATION &

STRATEGIES

PREPAREDNESS/

INCIDENT

MANAGEMENT

POLICY & PLANNING

INITIATIVES

DIRECTIVES &

EXECUTIVE ORDERS

REGIONAL, STATE, LOCAL REGIONAL, STATE, LOCAL
HSPDs(e.g., 5, 7, 8) EOs (e.g., 12406,3,
12472, 12656)

NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR

HOMELAND SECURITY

NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR

PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF CI/K

NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR HOMELAND SECURITY ACT PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF CI/KA HOMELAND SECURITY ACT

NRF, SUPPORT

FUNCTION

OPERATIONAL

NIPP NIPP

NATIONAL

PREPAREDNESS

GUIDELINES

NATIONAL

PREPAREDNESS

GUIDELINES
SCIPs SCIPS TICPs TICPS
Regional Strategic
Planning
Regional Strategic
Planning

STRATEGIC

PREPAREDNESS/

COMMUNICATIONS

PLANNING

INITIATIVES
Hazard Mitigation Hazard Mitigation
Emergency
Operations Plans
Emergency
Operations Plans
NIMS
HSPDs (e.g., 5, 7, 8) (e.g., 12046,
12472, 12656)
EOs

NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR

HOMELAND SECURITY
NECP
Communications-specific
Various emergency communications authorities shape, and are reflected in, the NECP— • Legislation—The Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended by the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2007, provides the primary authority for the homeland security mission and establishes a foundation for emergency communications efforts nationwide.

Other legislation identifies priorities at the national level and establishes departmental responsibilities and processes related to national preparedness and emergency communications.
1794
A – 4
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
• Strategies—National strategies provide the vision and strategic direction for emergency communications elements of the homeland security mission. For example, the National Strategy for Homeland Security emphasizes situational awareness as an incident management principle and stresses the importance of communications interoperability and survivability.

This strategy and others, such as the National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets, identify high-level actions and priorities for national preparedness related to communications (e.g., improving public safety communications, supporting development of interoperable, secure communications systems, coordinating interoperability standards, developing redundant communications networks, and promoting common standards and terminology for equipment and training). • Federal Directives and Executive Orders—These documents set national policies and executive mandates for specific initiatives, programs, and associated responsibilities. For example, Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 (HSPD 5) required the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to develop and implement a National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the National Response Plan (NRP). HSPD 8 mandated the development of a National Preparedness Goal to help entities build and maintain capabilities to prevent, protect, respond, and recover from major incidents. Other directives and executive orders identify and assign responsibilities for communications functions (e.g., spectrum, critical infrastructure, telecommunications continuity, and alert and warning). • Preparedness/ Incident Management DHS Policy and Planning Initiatives—National policy and planning initiatives follow from legislation, directives, and orders, implementing the programs and activities described therein. Consistent with these DHS policy initiatives, the NECP focuses on improving the emergency communications posture nationwide through strategic goals, objectives, initiatives, and milestones. Following are descriptions of some key Federal policy and planning initiatives for incident management and emergency response:
− National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP)—The NIPP, and supporting sectorspecific plans, establishes a comprehensive risk management framework that provides the unifying structure for integrating existing and future critical infrastructure and key resource (CI/KR) protection efforts into a single national program. The NIPP specifies key initiatives, milestones, and metrics required to protect the Nation’s CI/KR and provides a coordinated approach that defines the roles and responsibilities of Federal, State, and local governments as well as the private sector. − National Incident Management System (NIMS)—Provides a nationwide template for incident management, establishing uniform doctrine for command and management, resources, communications, information management, and supporting technologies.

Specific to communications, NIMS defines concepts and principles (e.g., interoperability, reliability, resiliency), management characteristics (e.g., communications types, planning, equipment standards, training), and standards and formats (e.g., radio usage procedures, plain language), which are clearly reflected in the NECP. − National Response Framework (NRF)—Establishes a comprehensive, national, allhazards approach to domestic incident response. The NRF is used broadly in an operational context for incident management activities related to pre-incident prevention and post-incident response and recovery.
1795
A – 5
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
− National Preparedness Guidelines—Provides readiness targets, priorities, standards for assessments and strategies, and a system for assessing the Nation’s overall level of preparedness. The guidelines consist of standard planning tools, such as the Target Capabilities List (TCL), that agencies should develop and maintain to provide guidance on the specific capabilities and levels of capability related to the homeland security mission.

In the area of communications, the TCL stresses the importance of operable, interoperable, and redundant communications during an emergency, and provides measures and metrics to define how quickly and how effectively critical communications tasks should be performed. The NECP was developed consistent with TCL guidelines and preparedness objectives, and should help local communities meet their requirements under TCL. • State, Regional, and Local Planning—The NECP provides a critical link between national priorities and strategic and tactical planning at the regional, State, and local levels. DHS has analyzed the progress and gaps identified through State and local planning efforts in developing the NECP’s priorities, initiatives, and associated actions. In turn, these national priorities will be incorporated into existing and future regional, State, and local planning efforts.

Descriptions of the key legislation, strategies, directives and executive orders, and policy initiatives that shape the emergency communications policy environment are provided below.

A2.1 Legislation
Exhibit A2-2 describes the key legislation that guides national efforts to ensure communications during crises.

Exhibit A2-2: Key Legislation
Name Date Description
The Communications Act
of 1934, amended by the
Telecommunications Act of
1996
June 19, 1934;
February 8, 1996
Authorizes the Executive Branch to manage communications during wartime and non-wartime emergencies, and creates the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as the chief regulatory authority for communications technologies. The FCC works to enhance emergency communications capabilities and addresses critical spectrum issues within the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau and in coordination with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA).

Defense Production Act of
1950 September 8, 1950
Ensures timely availability of the products, materials, and services needed to meet national defense and emergency preparedness requirements, and provides an operating structure to support a timely, comprehensive response by industry in a national emergency situation.

Information Technology
Management Reform Act
of 1996 (P.L. 104-106)
February 10, 1996
Specifies that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) develop standards, guidelines, and associated methods and techniques for Federal computer systems. Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) are developed by NIST when there are no existing voluntary standards to address the Federal requirements for the interoperability of different systems, portability of data and software, and computer security.

The Balanced Budget Act
of 1997; Deficit Reduction
Act (P.L. 109-171)
August 5, 1997;
February 8, 2006
Requires the FCC to allocate 24 MHz of spectrum in the 700 MHz band to public safety. The Deficit Reduction Act sets a firm deadline of February 2009 by which television broadcasters must vacate the occupied spectrum for the public safety community.
10 U.S.C. Section 372-380,
Military Support for
Civilian Law Enforcement
Agencies, as amended
1998
Establishes protocols for the development, use, support, and maintenance of communications equipment shared by the U.S. military and local law enforcement agencies.
1796
A – 6
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Name Date Description
The Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act
November 23, 1988
Establishes processes by which the Federal government can provide assistance to State, local, and tribal governments, individuals, and nongovernmental organizations (NGO) for all-hazards emergency response and recovery. This includes establishment and use of temporary communications systems in anticipation of or during an emergency.

Disaster Mitigation Act of
2000 (P.L. 106-390) October 30, 2000
Amends the Stafford Act and requires State mitigation plans as a condition of disaster assistance.

The Homeland Security
Act of 2002 (Public Law
[P.L.] 107-296)
November 25, 2002
Establishes the DHS as an executive department of the United States and specifies significant responsibilities associated with emergency preparedness, response, and recovery, including emergency communications and critical infrastructure. Includes provisions for coordinating or (as appropriate) consolidating communications systems related to homeland security at all levels of government.

Federal Information
Security Management Act
of 2002 (part of P.L. 107-
347)
December 17, 2002
Requires Federal agencies to develop a comprehensive information technology security program to ensure the effectiveness of information security controls over information resources that support Federal operations and assets.

The Intelligence Reform
and Terrorism Prevention
Act (P.L. 108-458)
December 17, 2004
Addresses national preparedness by identifying the need for a nationwide incident command system; establishes the Office for Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) for the enhancement of public safety interoperability; and calls for studies on interoperable communications standards, spectrum, and strategies to meet public safety communications requirements.

The Homeland Security
Appropriations Act of
2007 (P.L. 109-295),
including the 21st Century
Emergency
Communications Act of
2006
October 4, 2006
Includes Title VI, the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act, which reorganizes the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), amends the Stafford Act, and addresses emergency communications. In addition, the legislation amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add Title XVIII–Emergency Communications, establishing the Office of Emergency Communications (OEC) and specifying its responsibilities.

Transfers existing programs (e.g., Integrated Wireless Network, Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program) and elements of other programs (e.g., SAFECOM) to OEC and assigns new responsibilities (e.g., National Emergency Communications Plan, National Baseline Assessment, and outreach and coordination).

Implementing the
Recommendations of the
9/11 Commission Act of
2007 (P.L. 110-53)
August 3, 2007
Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish the Urban Area Security Initiative to provide grants to assist high-risk metropolitan areas to prevent, prepare for, protect against, and respond to terrorist acts. Establishes the State Homeland Security Grant Program to assist State, local, and tribal governments to prevent, prepare for, protect against, and respond to terrorist acts. Directs the Secretary to establish the Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program to make grants to States to carry out initiatives to improve international, national, regional, statewide, local, and tribal, interoperable emergency communications.
1797
A – 7
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
A2.2 Strategy
Exhibit A2-3 describes the key homeland security strategies that provide direction for emergency communications elements of the homeland security mission.

Exhibit A2-3: Key Homeland Security Strategies
Name Date Description
National Strategy for the
Physical Protection of
Critical Infrastructures
and Key Assets
February 2003
Identifies the policy, goals, objectives, and principles for actions needed to secure the infrastructures and assets vital to national security, governance, public health and safety, economy, and public confidence. Directs DHS to partner with the private sector to understand the risks associated with the physical vulnerabilities of critical infrastructures and key assets.

National Strategy to Secure
Cyberspace February 2003 Establishes priorities and initiatives to improve the physical security of cyber systems and communications, including interdependencies.

National Strategy for
Homeland Security
October 2007
(revised)
Provides a common framework to guide the Nation’s homeland security efforts toward achieving four primary goals: (1) prevent and disrupt terrorist attacks; (2) protect people, critical infrastructures, and key resources; (3) respond and recover from incidents; and (4) strengthen the homeland security foundation for long-term success. Specific to communications, the strategy emphasizes situational awareness as a critical incident management principle and stresses the importance of communications interoperability and survivability.

A2.3 Directives and Executive Orders
Exhibit A2-4 describes the key directives and executive orders for ensuring communications during crises.

Exhibit A2-4: Key Directives and Executive Orders
Name Date Description
Executive Order 12046,
Relating to the Transfer of
Telecommunications
Functions
March 27, 1978
Delegates presidential responsibilities for management of the Federal electromagnetic spectrum to the Secretary of Commerce. Provides for the continuation of the Inter-department Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC) to assist the Secretary in exercising the delegated presidential authority.

Department of Commerce
Organization Order 10-10 May 9, 1978
Establishes the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), delegates presidential responsibilities for management of the electromagnetic spectrum to its administrator, and establishes the administrator’s authority and responsibility for all radio communications systems operated by the Federal government.

Presidential Directive 53,
National Security
Telecommunications Policy
November 15,
1979
Reaffirms the need for connectivity for the Nation’s leaders and the ability to respond, restore, and recover the national telecommunication infrastructure in all emergencies.

Executive Order 12372,
Intergovernmental Review of
Federal Programs
July 14, 1982
Intends to foster intergovernmental partnerships by providing opportunities for State, regional, and local coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.

National Security Decision
Directive 97, National
Security Telecommunications
Policy
June 13, 1983
Sets requirements for emergency restoration and recovery of communications that support the Nation’s leaders, worldwide intelligence, and diplomacy.

Confirms the provision of interoperable, reliable, and secure communications for the President and his chief advisors as a national priority.

Executive Order 12472,
Assignment of National
Security and Emergency
Preparedness (NS/EP)
Telecommunications
Functions
April 3, 1984
Establishes the National Communications System (NCS) as the Federal interagency system to ensure that the national telecommunications infrastructure is responsive to the NS/EP needs of national leaders, the military, the Intelligence Community, and emergency responders. Establishes NCS as the focal point for joint industry/government NS/EP communications planning and directs the establishment of a national coordinating center. Establishes DHS as the agency responsible for planning, providing, operating, and maintaining telecommunications services and facilities as part of the National Emergency Management Systems. Identifies DHS’ role in advising, assisting, and ensuring that State and local governments develop and maintain national security and emergency preparedness telecommunications plans. 1798
A – 8
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Name Date Description
Executive Order 12656,
Assignment of EP
Responsibilities
November 18,
1988
Delegates NS/EP responsibilities to Federal departments and agencies, instructs agencies to develop plans and capabilities that will ensure continuity of operations, and reaffirms the need for interagency cooperation in the pursuit of telecommunications NS/EP.

NCS Directive 3-1,
Telecommunications
Operations
August 10, 2000
Implements policy, assigns responsibilities, and establishes procedures for the Telecommunications Service Priority (TSP) Program. Authorizes priority services for domestic telecommunications services (e.g., Government Emergency Telecommunications Service [GETS] and Wireless Priority Service [WPS]).

Executive Order 13231,
Critical Infrastructure
Protection
October 16, 2001
Establishes the President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board, tasked with ensuring the protection of information systems for critical infrastructure, including emergency preparedness communications and the physical assets that support these systems.

Homeland Security
Presidential Directive
(HSPD) 5, Management of
Domestic Incidents
February 28,
2003
Directs the Secretary of DHS to develop and administer a national incident management system. The system is to provide a consistent nationwide approach to enable Federal, State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector to work together effectively and efficiently to prepare for, prevent, respond to, and recover from domestic incidents regardless of cause, size, or complexity.

HSPD 7, Critical
Infrastructure Identification,
Prioritization, and
Protection
December 17,
2003
Calls for Federal departments and agencies to identify, prioritize, and coordinate the protection of critical infrastructures and key resources to prevent, deter, and mitigate the effects of deliberate efforts to destroy, incapacitate, or exploit them. Assigns DHS (delegated to the NCS) as the lead for coordinating protection of national critical infrastructures, including the communications sector.

HSPD 8, National
Preparedness
December 17,
2003
Establishes policies to strengthen national preparedness to prevent and respond to terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies by requiring a national domestic all-hazards preparedness goal. Establishes mechanisms for improved delivery of Federal preparedness assistance to State and local governments, and outlines actions to strengthen the preparedness capabilities of Federal, State, regional, local, and tribal entities.

Spectrum Policy for the
21st Century, The
President’s Spectrum Policy
Initiative
November 30,
2004
Establishes processes to implement a comprehensive U.S. Spectrum Policy to foster economic growth, ensure national and homeland security, maintain U.S. global leadership in communications technology development and services, and satisfy other vital needs in areas such as public safety, scientific research, Federal transportation infrastructure, and law enforcement. NTIA leads the implementation of this initiative. Also calls for DHS to develop a comprehensive plan for non-Federal public safety spectrum needs.

Executive Order 13407,
Public Warning System June 28, 2006
Calls for an effective, reliable, integrated, and flexible system to alert and warn the American people in all-hazard emergencies. DHS is the Executive Agent for the Public Alert and Warning System Program.

HSPD 20, National
Continuity Policy May 4, 2007
Establishes National Essential Functions, which prescribe continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies and provide guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments and private sector organizations.

NCS Directive 3-10,
Minimum Requirements for
Continuity Communications
Capabilities
July 25, 2007
Requires that all departments and agencies that support National Essential Functions operate and maintain—or have dedicated access to— communications capabilities at their headquarters and alternate operating facilities, as well as mobile in-transit communications capabilities, to ensure continuation of mission critical functions across the full spectrum of hazards, threats, and emergencies, including catastrophic attacks or disasters. 1799
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
A – 9
A2.4 National-Level Policy and Planning Initiatives
Exhibit A2-5 describes the key national-level policy and planning initiatives that guide emergency response efforts.

Exhibit A2-5: Key National-Level Policy and Planning Initiatives Name Date Description
National Incident
Management System
(NIMS)
March 1, 2004
The NIMS presents a unified approach to incident management, provides standard command and control structures, and emphasizes preparedness, mutual aid, and resource management. The NIMS emphasizes that establishing and maintaining a common operational picture and ensuring accessibility and interoperability are principal goals of communications and information management.

Manual of Regulations and
Procedures for Federal
Radio Frequency
Management
May 2003
edition;
September 2006
revision
Issued by the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to address the Department of Commerce’s frequency management responsibilities pursuant to delegated authority under Section 305 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

National Infrastructure
Protection Plan (NIPP) July 2006
The NIPP, and supporting sector-specific plans, establishes a comprehensive risk management framework that provides the unifying structure for integrating existing and future critical infrastructure and key resource (CI/KR) protection efforts into a single national program. The NIPP specifies the key initiatives, milestones, and metrics required to protect the Nation’s CI/KR and provides a coordinated approach that defines the roles and responsibilities of Federal, State, and local governments as well as the private sector.

National Preparedness
Guidelines September 2007
Provides readiness targets, priorities, standards for assessments and strategies, and a system for assessing the Nation’s overall level of preparedness. Consists of related preparedness tools, such as the National Preparedness Vision, National Planning Scenarios, the Universal Task List, and the Target Capabilities List.

National Response
Framework (NRF),
including Emergency
Support Function (ESF) #2
December 2004;
re-released
January 22, 2008
Establishes a comprehensive all-hazards approach to enhance the ability of the United States to manage domestic incidents. Provides the structure and mechanisms to coordinate and integrate incident management activities and emergency support functions across Federal, State, local, and tribal government entities, and the private sector. ESF #2, led by NCS, ensures Federal communications support to Federal, State, local, tribal, and private sector efforts.

A2.5 State, Regional, and Local Planning
Exhibit A2-6 describes some of the key regional, State, and local planning initiatives related to emergency communications.

Exhibit A2-6: Key Regional, State, and Local Planning Initiatives Name Date Description
State and Local Guide
(SLG) 101: Guide for AllHazard Emergency
Operations Planning
September 1996
Provides emergency response agencies with information on FEMA’s concept for developing risk-based, all-hazard emergency operations plans. Clarifies the preparedness, response, and short-term recovery planning elements that warrant inclusion in State and local Emergency Operations Plans.

Tactical Interoperable
Communications Plan
(TICP)
December 2006
TICPs present a region’s plan for establishing and maintaining tactical interoperable communications, defined as the rapid provision of on-scene, incident-based, mission-critical voice communications among all firstresponder agencies, in support of an incident command system as defined in the NIMS model. Developed initially by the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) areas in response to Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) guidance.
1800
A – 10
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Name Date Description
Statewide Communication
Interoperability Plan
(SCIP)
March 2008
Describes the strategic vision, goals, and key long-term and short-term strategic initiatives for States to improve communications interoperability.

Serves as a mechanism and roadmap to align emergency responders at all levels of State government to improve communications interoperability.

Developed initially in response to FY07 HSGP and Public Safety Interoperable Communications (PSIC) Grant Program requirements.
1801
A – 11
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

Appendix 3: Key Federal Emergency Communications Initiatives, Programs, Systems, and Services
This appendix presents a summary of key Federal initiatives related to emergency communications collected as part of the ECPC clearinghouse Federal Interoperability Catalog. While this is not an exhaustive inventory of Federal programs, the information below represents the most comprehensive data set to date and will act as living document. The summary below promotes emergency interoperable communications information sharing and awareness among Federal agencies by highlighting programs and initiatives that are related to other departments and agencies, including:
• Policy and Planning Initiatives
• Federal Systems and Services
• Information Sharing and Command and Control Centers
• Standards and Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Initiatives • Grant Funding Initiatives
• Training and Exercise Initiatives.

Exhibit A3-1 summarizes key emergency communications policy and planning initiatives.

Exhibit A3-1: Key Emergency Communications Policy and Planning Initiatives Type of
Policy/Plan Key Policies, Plans, and Assessments Lead Agency Strategy,
Legislation,
Directives
ƒ See Appendix 2 for overview of National Strategies, Legislation, Directives, and Executive Orders related to emergency communications
ƒ Executive
branch,
Congress
Regulatory,
Spectrum
Management
ƒ Regulation of interstate and international communications (by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable)
− Spectrum (e.g., 700 MHz D Block, digital television transition, 800MHz rebanding) − Alert and warning (e.g., Public Safety Access Point [PSAP], Enhanced 911, Emergency Alert System [EAS], commercial mobile alerts)
− Other (e.g., priority telecommunications and amateur radio services, special temporary authority)
ƒ Federal government spectrum management, communications policy initiatives ƒ FCC
ƒ NTIA
National
Preparedness
Doctrine32
ƒ National Response Framework (NRF), Emergency Support Function #2 (ESF#2), National Incident Management System (NIMS)
ƒ National Preparedness Guidelines: Target Capabilities List (TCL), Universal Task List (UTL), National Planning Scenarios
ƒ DHS
ƒ DHS
Emergency
Communications
Planning
ƒ National/regional planning: National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP), National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP), FEMA Disaster Emergency Communications (DEC) planning, Regional Emergency Communications Coordination (RECC planning) ƒ State-level planning: Statewide Communication Interoperability Plans (SCIP), all-hazard emergency operations planning (and communications annexes) ƒ Local-level planning: Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans (TICP), all-hazard emergency operations planning (and communications annexes) ƒ DHS
ƒ State
agencies
ƒ Local
agencies
National-Level
Assessments
ƒ National Communications Capability Report (NCCR), SAFECOM National Interoperability Baseline Survey, DHS Nationwide Plan Review, Tactical Interoperable Communications Scorecard Report, others
ƒ NSTAC Emergency Communications and Interoperability Report, Katrina After Action Reports, 9/11 Commission Reports
ƒ DHS
ƒ Multiple
authors
32 Appendix 2 provides additional information on National Preparedness Doctrine. 1802
A – 12
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Exhibit A3-2 presents key tactical and emergency communications systems and programs, as well as telecommunications and other support services provided by Federal government agencies.

Exhibit A3-2: Federal Tactical and Emergency Communications Systems and Services Department Agency/Bureau Key Programs/Projects/Resources Commerce NTIA Office of Spectrum Management (e.g., national interoperability channel resources)
DHS
Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)
Secure Border Initiative Network (SBINet)
Tactical Modernization Program
Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA)
Disaster Emergency Communications (DEC)
Mobile Emergency Response System (MERS)
FEMA National Radio System (FNARS)
Emergency Alert System (EAS) (with FCC, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA]), Digital Emergency Alert System (DEAS) Geo-Targeted Alerting System (GTAS) (with NOAA)
DHS Web Alert and Relay Network (WARN)
Integrated Public Alert & Warning System (IPAWS) (with FCC, NOAA/NWS) National Warning and Alert System (NAWAS)
Homeland Security Preparedness Technical Assistance Program (e.g., Response/Recovery focusing on Interoperable Communications) Immigrations and Customs
Enforcement (ICE)
Atlas Program
National Communications
System (NCS)
Government Emergency Telecommunications Service (GETS)
Telecommunications Service Priority (TSP) Program
Wireless Priority Service (WPS)
Shared Resources (SHARES) High-Frequency (HF) Radio Program ESF #2 Communications Asset Database (CAD)
OEC
Integrated Wireless Network (IWN)
Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program (ICTAP) SAFECOM (guidance, tools, templates)
FPIC integration projects
Communications Asset Survey and Mapping (CASM) Tool
ECPC clearinghouse
OIC SAFECOM (R&D, T&E, Standards)
Office of the Chief Information
Officer (OCIO)
OneNet
Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN)
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
Rescue 21
Nationwide Automatic Identification System (NAIS)
Deepwater
DoD
DoD
Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) Joint Tactical Radio System
Transformational Satellite Communications System (TSAT) Joint task force civil support assets for disaster relief Global Information Grid (GIG)
Department of the Army Army installation land mobile radio (LMR) systems Joint Interoperability Test Command
U.S. Marine Corps Marine Corps Network Operations and Security Center Department of the Navy National Enterprise Land Mobile Radio (ELMR) infrastructure National Guard Bureau (NGB)
Air National Guard (ANG)–Theater Deployable Communications (TDC) Joint Incident Site Communications Capability (JISCC)
Army National Guard (ARNG) Joint Network Node (JNN) / Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T)
DOJ
Wireless Management Office
(WMO)
IWN
DOJ 25 cities

COMMTECH
WMO/Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI)
Satellite Mutual Aid Radio Talkgroup (SMART)
DOE OCIO Information Resource Program (includes wireless communications) DOI DOI OCIO Enterprise
Infrastructure Division
Public Safety Communications Program
1803
A – 13
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Department Agency/Bureau Key Programs/Projects/Resources Bureau of Land Management
(BML)
National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) assets
Aircraft Management Division
(AMD)
Joint aircraft all-risk-management, with USDA
DOT National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Enhanced 9-1-1
Next-Generation 9-1-1
USDA U.S. Forest Service National Interagency Incident Communications Division (NIICD) (partnership with Department of the Interior agencies)
Treasury Wireless Programs Office IWN
FCC Public Safety Homeland
Security Bureau (PSHSB)
PSHSB clearinghouse, ESF #2 CAD
Disaster Information Reporting System (DIRS)
Network Outage Reporting System (NORS)
NOAA National Weather Service
(NWS)
Alert and warning systems (e.g., EAS, GTAS)
Exhibit A3-3 presents examples of key homeland defense, homeland security, and public safety centers that have been established to share critical and sensitive information to protect the Nation, and to provide proper levels of command and control over field forces that could be brought to bear for incidents that require Federal assistance. These centers coordinate information, provide support to Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies engaged in response or recovery activities, and ensure that affected parties receive critical or sensitive information in a timely manner.

Exhibit A3-3: Information Sharing and Command and Control Centers Coordination
Centers
Lead
Agency Supporting/Participating Departments and Agencies National Operations
Center (NOC)
DHS/Office of
Operations
Coordination
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), USCG, Bureau CBP, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), DoD, DOE, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), DOI, Department of State, DOT, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS), FBI, FEMA, Federal Protective Service (FPS), Geo-spatial Mapping Office, ICE, Information Analysis Office, Infrastructure Protection Office, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), National Capital Region (NCR), NOAA, National Security Agency, Postal Inspection Service, DHS Public Affairs, DHS Science and Technology Directorate, United States Secret Service (USSS), DHS State and Local Coordination Office, Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), Metropolitan Police of the District of Columbia (MPDC), New York Police Department (NYPD)
National Response
Coordination Center
(NRCC)
DHS/FEMA Commerce, DoD, DOE, Department of Housing and Urban Development, DOI, DOJ, Department of Labor, Department of State, DOT, EPA, FCC, FEMA, General Services Administration, HHS, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NCS, National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Personnel Management, Social Security Administration, Treasury, U.S. Agency for International Development, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, USCG, USDA, U.S. Postal Service, VA, American Red Cross, Corporation for National and Community Service, Small Business Administration, Tennessee Valley Authority
National Response
Center (NRC)
DHS/USCG Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR), DoD/Edgewood Chemical Biological Center (ECBC), DOE, EPA, FBI, FEMA, HHS/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), DOT/Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Nuclear Regulatory Commission
National Interagency
Fire Center (NIFC)
Interior/USFS USFS/BLM, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, NOAA/NWS, DOI/National Business Center/Aviation Management Division, US Fire Administration, National Association of State Foresters 1804
A – 14
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
t Coordination
Centers
Lead
Agency Supporting/Participating Depar ments and Agencies National Law
Enforcement
Communications
Center (NLECC)

DHS/CBP ICE
National
Coordinating Center
for
Telecommunications
(NCC)
DHS/NCS Communications Information Sharing and Analysis Center (Comm ISAC) National
Counterterrorism
Center (NCTC)
Director of
National
Intelligence
CIA, FBI, and 14 other classified and unclassified agencies National Military
Command Center
(NMCC)
DoD Joint Staff of the armed forces
Exhibit A3-4 presents key standards and RDT&E initiatives involving emergency communications.

Exhibit A3-4: Standards Development and RDT&E Initiatives Type of
Initiative Initiative
Key
Organizations/Departments/
Agencies
Digital Public
Safety Radio
Standards
APCO Project 25 (P25), P25 Compliance Assessment Program APCO, Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA), DHS, National
Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST)
Broadband
Committees
APCO Project 25 Interface Committee (APIC) Broadband Task Group, Project Mesa, P34

APCO, TIA, NIST
Data Exchange
Standards
Emergency Data Exchange Language (EDXL) Messaging Standards Initiative, Common Alerting Protocol (CAP)–Distribution Element (DE), Hospital Availability Exchange (HAVE) and Resource Messaging (RM), National Information Exchange Model (NIEM)

DOJ, DHS, COMCARE
RDT&E
Programs
ƒ DHS Science and Technology Directorate (S&T): 4.9 GHz Wireless Standard, Voice over Internet Protocol (VOIP) specifications, Digital Vocoder Working Group, Radio over Wireless Broadband (ROW-B), Multi-Band Radio
ƒ NTIA Institute for Telecommunications Sciences (ITS): Broadband Wireless, Digital LMR, IT, Propagation Measurements and Models, Spectrum Research, Technology Transfer
ƒ National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) System
ƒ Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADA) ƒ DoD RDT&E programs
ƒDHS/OIC
ƒ ITS
ƒDOJ/National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
ƒDoC/NTIA, NIST
ƒDoD
1805
A – 15
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Exhibit A3-5 presents key Federal grant initiatives related to interoperable and emergency communications.

Exhibit A3-5: Federal Grant Initiatives for Emergency Communications Type of Initiative Grant Program Lead Agency
Interoperability Grant
Programs
ƒ Public Safety Interoperable Communications (PSIC) Grant Program ƒ Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program (IECGP) NTIA
DHS
National Preparedness
Grant Programs (scope
includes interoperable
communications)
ƒ Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP)
– State Homeland Security Program (SHSP)
– Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI)
– Citizen Corps Program (CCP)
– Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS)
ƒ Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program (LETPP)
ƒ Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG)
ƒ Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG)
ƒ Buffer Zone Protection Plan (BZPP)
ƒ Transit Security Grant Program (TSGP)
ƒ Homeland Security National Training Program (HSNTP) and Competitive Training Grant Program (CTGP)
DHS
Grant Guidance, Tools,
and Assistance
ƒ Grant guidance materials and associated support
– SAFECOM grant guidance
– Authorized Equipment List (AEL)
– SAVER Program
– Technical assistance
ƒ InterAgency Board (IAB), Standardized Equipment List (SEL) DHS
DOJ, DoD, crossgovernmental
participants
Exhibit A3-6 presents key Federal training and exercise initiatives involving emergency communications.

Exhibit A3-6: Federal Training and Exercise Initiatives Type of
Initiative Key Program(s) Lead Agency
Training
Emergency Management Institute (EMI) (e.g., residential courses, independent study [e.g., NIMS, NRF], continuity of operations) DHS
Communications Unit Leader (COML) curriculum development DHS/OIC, Incident Management Systems Integration Division (IMSID), National Wildfire
Coordinating Group (NWCG), FEMA
Exercise
National Exercise Program (NEP) DHS/FEMA
Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) DHS Top officials (TOPOFF) 4 DHS/FEMA
Determined accord DHS/FEMA
National Nuclear Security Formal Exercise Program DOE/National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
Disaster response exercises (international and national exercises) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Hurricane preparedness tabletop exercises DHS
Golden Phoenix DoD
TICP exercises Requirement by DHS for UASI regions
1806
A – 16
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Appendix 4: DHS Organizations with Responsibilities and Programs Supporting Emergency Communications
Improving the Nation’s ability to communicate effectively during emergency situations is among the most fundamental missions assigned to DHS. With passage of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and subsequent amendments over the last five years, DHS has assumed lead responsibility for many of the U.S. Government’s most important national communications functions, while simultaneously creating new programs to meet emerging communications needs at the Federal, State, local, and tribal levels.

The consolidation of emergency communications missions, roles, and responsibilities under DHS is an important step toward coordinating and improving communications planning, preparedness, protection, crisis management, and recovery operations after September 11, 2001. DHS’ communications initiatives and capabilities serve a diverse set of customers: the President; the executive branch of the Federal Government; defense and intelligence agencies; law enforcement; State, local, and tribal authorities; emergency responders; and critical infrastructure owners and operators.

For the emergency response community, OEC was established in 2007 as the focal point for developing, implementing, and coordinating interoperable and operable communications for emergency responders at all levels of government. OEC oversees three programs for improving emergency communications for Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies—the Integrated Wireless Network (IWN), the Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program (ICTAP), and the SAFECOM program (excluding its RDT&E and standards functions). In addition, OEC is responsible for implementing new programs and initiatives to enhance interoperable communications, including:
• Statewide Communication Interoperability Plans (SCIP): SCIPs are locally driven, multi-jurisdictional, and multi-disciplinary plans to address statewide interoperability. For the first time in history, all 56 States and territories have developed SCIPs, marking a critical milestone in breaking down
the barriers of the past and
establishing a roadmap for future
interoperability. These plans address
designated critical elements for
statewide interoperability and must be
approved by OEC for a State to
qualify for grant funding through the Homeland Security Grant Program and Public Safety Interoperable Communications (PSIC) Grant Program.
• National Communications Capabilities Report (NCCR): The NCCR provides a framework for evaluating current emergency communications capabilities across all levels of government. The NCCR will help government officials to determine priorities and to allocate resources more effectively.
• Emergency Communications Preparedness Center (ECPC): The ECPC is the Federal focal point and clearinghouse for coordinating interoperability efforts among Federal departments and agencies. OEC currently chairs the ECPC Working Group, which coordinated Federal input to the NECP. The ECPC’s annual strategic assessment for Congress describes the current status of Federal interoperable communications.

OEC’s Communications Assets Survey and
Mapping (CASM) tool provides an inventory
and analysis of interoperability communications
planning for use by emergency response agencies
nationwide. The tool allows agencies to store and
display data about their communications assets.
1807
A – 17
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
To accomplish its overall mission, OEC must coordinate with other DHS organizations that have responsibilities for ensuring communications and with other Federal departments and agencies.

The following describes OEC’s primary partners within DHS, including their key communications functions, programs, and responsibilities.

FEMA Disaster Emergency Communications (DEC) Division, organized under FEMA’s Disaster Operations Directorate, prepares for and delivers emergency communications assistance during major disasters. FEMA DEC plays a key role in integrating and coordinating Federal disaster communications services and capabilities in FEMA regions and in the incident area.

Key FEMA DEC planning activities include the following:
• State Emergency Planning: To support FEMA’s integration role, FEMA DEC assists in the development of emergency communications plans and procedures for regions and States; supports standards and technical advancements to improve communications; and conducts training, tests, and exercises of emergency communications capabilities and procedures. FEMA DEC also provides an integration and coordination point for Federal departments and agencies that provide disaster communications capabilities and support during incidents.
• DEC Integration Branch: The primary responsibilities of FEMA’s Communications Integration Branch (CIB) is to advance the establishment of the DEC end-state architecture and integrate FEMA DEC services with FEMA Headquarters (HQ), regions, emergency communications program offices (e.g., OEC, OIC), communications capability providers (e.g., United States Coast Guard, National Guard Bureau, USNORTHCOM), and response agencies. The CIB supports the FEMA regional offices by providing assistance and guidance in DEC planning and policies, guidance and oversight of the RECCWGs, and assistance in a disaster when the region requires such assistance. • DEC Tactical Branch: The Tactical Emergency Communications Branch (TECB) of the FEMA DEC Division is composed of two key components: Mobile Emergency Response Support (MERS) Program Management and MERS Detachments. MERS provides rapidly deployable command, control, and disaster emergency communications capabilities and tactical operations and logistics support for on-scene management of disaster response activities. MERS is a key FEMA disaster response asset that plays an important role in supporting disaster response operations
The National Communications System (NCS) is an interagency system that brings together 24 Federal departments and agencies in a joint planning framework for National Security and Emergency Preparedness (NS/EP) telecommunications. The NCS supports the Executive Office of the President for Enduring Constitutional Government, Continuity of Operations (COOP), and Continuity of Government (COG), and delivers a suite of priority telecommunications services to national leaders. To ensure effective planning and response, the NCS manages the National Coordinating Center for Telecommunications (NCC), a public-private partnership for sharing information and coordinating response and recovery operations.

The NCS has a number of responsibilities and programs to enhance communications for the emergency response community. As the coordinator for Emergency Support Function (ESF) #2 (Communications), the NCS is responsible for ensuring that the Nation’s communications infrastructure and capabilities are maintained in any emergency situation. The NCS is responsible for coordinating the planning and provisioning of NS/EP communications for the 1808
A – 18
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Federal Government under all hazards, including crisis recovery and reconstitution. The NCS monitors emergency situations to determine the potential impact on existing telecommunications services and to ensure that sufficient
telecommunications capability is provided to
support response efforts.

The NCS also offers an array of NS/EP
priority communications services and
programs to support emergency response.

The Government Emergency
Telecommunications Service (GETS)
provides emergency access and priority
processing on the local and long-distance
portions of the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN). The Wireless Priority Service (WPS) gives Federal, State, local, and critical infrastructure personnel priority access calling on cellular networks for NS/EP purposes during times of high network congestion. The Telecommunications Service Priority (TSP) Program managed by NCS gives NS/EP users priority processing of their telecommunications service requests in the event of service disruption.

The Office for Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) was established in 2004 to strengthen and integrate interoperability and compatibility efforts to improve Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency response and preparedness. Managed by the Science and Technology Directorate, OIC helps coordinate interoperability issues across DHS. OIC programs and initiatives address critical interoperability and compatibility issues. Priority areas include communications, equipment, and training. Key OIC activities include:
• Standards Acceleration: OIC is working with NIST and the Institute for Telecommunication Sciences (ITS) to support the efforts of the emergency response community and the private sector, as they accelerate the development of the Project 25 (P25) suite of standards. P25 standards will help produce voice communications equipment that is interoperable and compatible, regardless of manufacturer. In addition to interoperability, P25 aims to promote spectral efficiency, backwards compatibility, and scalability. OIC is also partnering with emergency responders, Federal agencies, and standards development organizations, including the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), to accelerate the creation of data messaging standards. The EDXL Messaging Standards Initiative is a practitioner-driven, publicprivate partnership to create information sharing capabilities between disparate emergency response software applications, systems, and devices. The resulting Extensible Markup Language (XML) standards assist the emergency response community in sharing data seamlessly and securely while responding to an incident. • Compliance Assessment: In collaboration with its partners, OIC is establishing a P25 Compliance Assessment Program (CAP) to provide demonstrable evidence of P25 product compliance. P25 CAP will improve adoption of P25 standards in manufacturer systems while creating a mechanism enabling procurement officers and the emergency response community to confidently purchase and use P25 compliant products. The P25 CAP program ensures that emergency response equipment is compliant, thus improving interoperable communications. It also stimulates competition among manufacturers, which results in more affordable technologies for the emergency response community.

The NCS SHAred RESources (SHARES)
High-Frequency (HF) Radio Program
provides a single interagency emergency voice
and data message-handling system. SHARES
brings together the assets of thousands of HF
radio stations to transmit NS/EP information
when normal communications are unavailable.

SHARES provides the Federal government with
a forum for addressing issues affecting HF
radio interoperability.
1809
A – 19
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
• Technology Demonstrations: OIC conducts Technology Demonstration Projects across the Nation to test and demonstrate technologies in real-world environments, including data and video, and strategically assess results.
• Communications Unit Leader (COML) Training: OIC developed the COML curriculum to establish a standardized course of training for communications in a Type III incident. The Type III COML course trains emergency responders on how to be radio communications leaders during all-hazards emergency operations—significantly improving communications across multiple jurisdictions and disciplines responding to an incident.

The course was delivered to the National Incident Management System (NIMS) Incident Management Systems Integration Division (IMSID) and was accepted as NIMS compliant.

Through the development of the Type III COML course, DHS will provide a tool for training communications unit leaders and their command and general staff to perform the critical mission of managing interagency and cross-disciplinary communications during allhazards incidents.

OEC and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are collaborating on a series of communications projects to improve interoperability for law enforcement and other first responders along the Canadian and Mexican borders. CBP operates and maintains various command, control, communications, and
intelligence (C3I) assets that could be used
during a crisis. These include very high
frequency (VHF) and high frequency (HF)
national tactical radio networks and several
local communications centers.

During all crises, U.S. Bureau of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) uses many public and governmentoperated systems to communicate with other executive branch agencies, elements of the Intelligence Community, and Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies. In an effort to improve coordination and interoperability between CBP and ICE, DHS established the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) to link a number of organizational components with communications and other technology for a comprehensive border enforcement approach.

The U.S. Coast Guard maintains a disciplined command and control (C2) communications system that consists of several integrated components that are designed to be interoperable with DoD components in times of national emergency and/or war. The U.S. Coast Guard plays an active role in Federal interoperability forums, including the ECPC and Federal Partnership for Interoperable Communications (FPIC).

The Secure Border Initiative (SBI) is a project
to control U.S. borders and reduce illegal
immigration. The SBINet is a key piece of SBI
that promotes real-time communications among
Border Patrol agents. Systems such as the
Treasury Enforcement Communications System
are also used to coordinate between CBP’s
Office of Border Patrol and ICE’s Office of
Investigations.
1810
A – 20
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Appendix 5: The SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum
The SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum, developed with practitioner input from the DHS’ SAFECOM program, is designed to help emergency response agencies and policymakers plan and implement interoperability solutions for data and voice communications. The tool identifies five critical elements that must be addressed to achieve a sophisticated interoperability solution:
governance, standard operating procedures (SOP), technology, training and exercises, and usage of interoperable communications. Jurisdictions across the Nation can use the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum to track their progress in strengthening interoperable communications.

SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum Elements
Interoperability is a multidimensional challenge. To gain a true picture of a jurisdiction’s interoperability capabilities, its progress in each of the five interdependent elements must be considered. For example, when a jurisdiction procures new equipment, it also should plan and conduct training and exercises to ensure that it make the best use of the equipment. What constitutes optimal interoperability is determined by the individual needs of an agency or jurisdiction. The SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum is a guide for jurisdictions when they are considering new interoperability solution, either because their needs have changed or because additional funding has become available. An evolving tool, the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum supports the National Preparedness Strategy and aligns with national frameworks, including, but not limited to, the National Response Framework, NIMS, the National Emergency Communications Plan, and the National Communications Baseline Assessment. To maximize the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum’s value to the emergency response community, SAFECOM will regularly update the tool using a consensus process that involves practitioners, technical experts, and representatives from Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies.

Exhibit A5-1: SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum
1811
A – 21
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Appendix 6: NECP Stakeholder Coordination
OEC used a three-phased approach to develop the NECP that relied on stakeholder involvement at each stage: Data Gathering and Analysis, Strategy Development, and Plan Development and Review.

Exhibit A6-1: National Emergency Communications Plan Approach Stakeholder Outreach and Coordination
OEC considered stakeholder involvement the single most important element in the NECP development process. In accordance with Title XVIII requirements, OEC was directed to develop the NECP in cooperation with Federal departments and agencies; State, local, and tribal governments; emergency response providers; and the private sector. To engage this diverse group of stakeholders, OEC established a cross-governmental focus group of emergency response personnel and coordinated with existing councils, committees, associations, and partnerships that represent the emergency response community.

At the Federal level, OEC coordinated with the Emergency Communications Preparedness Center (ECPC) and the Federal Partnership for Interoperable Communications (FPIC). At the State and local levels, OEC worked closely with the SAFECOM Executive Committee/Emergency Response Council (EC/ERC) and the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC). Private sector involvement was coordinated through the Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council (CIPAC), which included representatives from the Communications Sector Coordinating Council, the Emergency Services Coordinating Council, the Information Technology Coordination Council, and the State, local, territorial, and Tribal Government Coordinating Council.

Phase 1: Data Gathering and Analysis
As a key first phase in the development process, OEC drew heavily from a foundation of emergency communications documentation and initiatives. During this data gathering and analysis phase, OEC worked in coordination with stakeholders to identify key emergency communications policies, strategies, plans, and reports for consideration. OEC then analyzed findings, lessons learned, issues, gaps, priorities, and recommendations from numerous sources, including the NCCR; SCIPs; the 2006 National Interoperability Baseline Survey and numerous after-action reports from September 11, 2001, Hurricane Katrina and other recent natural and man-made incidents. These source documents were key drivers for the NECP’s assessment of the current state-of-emergency communications and also helped shape the NECP’s strategic 1812
A – 22
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
goals, objectives, and initiatives. A list of the key documentation used to develop the NECP is presented in Appendix 7.

Phase 2: Strategy Development
Next, OEC worked closely with stakeholders to develop the high-level strategy for the NECP.

Building on the legislative requirements, OEC used information gleaned from the data gathering and analysis effort, as well as stakeholder involvement, to craft the NECP’s overarching strategic goals and priority initiatives. OEC worked with key coordination bodies (e.g., EC/ERC, ECPC, and NECP Focus Group) to develop and prioritize the specific near- and long-term emergency communications actions needed to implement these initiatives.

Phase 3: Plan Development and Review
During the final phases of NECP development, OEC conducted extensive outreach efforts to ensure that both DHS and external public and private sector stakeholders had an opportunity to review the document. Exhibit A6-2 illustrates the key steps in the evolution of the NECP—the key inputs and the considerations that shaped its goals and initiatives—and also demonstrates how OEC will work with the emergency response community to use the plan as a framework to improve its communications planning and capabilities as well as overall coordination nationwide.

Exhibit A6-2: Key Steps in Evolution of the NECP
The success of the NECP requires the commitment of all emergency response disciplines at all levels of government. Achieving its goals and priority objectives will require coordination across geographical, political, and cultural jurisdictions and boundaries. OEC’s current levers and incentives for driving NECP implementation include the provision of technical assistance to State, regional, local and tribal government officials; grant guidance and the coordination of DHS administered grant programs (such as the IECGP); and the coordination of Federal 1813
A – 23
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
activities through the ECPC and FPIC. In addition, OEC will use statutory reporting requirements to monitor and report on progress towards implementing the NECP (e.g., State annual reports under the IECGP, the RECCWG annual reports, the ECPC annual strategic assessment, and OEC’s assessment and biennial progress reports). 1814
A – 24
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Appendix 7: NECP Source Documents
State, Local, and Tribal
National Governors Association 2007 State Homeland Security Directors Survey. National Governors Association. December 2007.

Emergency Response Council Agreements
on a Nationwide Plan for Interoperable
Communications. SAFECOM Emergency
Response Council (ERC) (with support from
the Office of Emergency Communications and
the Office for Interoperability and
Compatibility). July 2007.

Indian Country Border Security and Tribal Interoperability Pilot Program: The Importance of Tribes at the Frontlines of Border and Homeland Security (TBS Pilot Program) Final Report. The National Native American Law Enforcement Association; the National Congress of American Indians.

March 2006.

National Associations, Task Forces, Advisory Committees, and Panels Joint Advisory Committee on Communications Capabilities of Emergency Medical and Public Health Care Facilities Report to Congress. February 2008.

Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International (APCO) Homeland Security & Preparedness Version 2.1.

APCO International. September 2007.

National Security Telecommunications
Advisory Committee Report on Emergency
Communications and Interoperability. The
President’s National Security
Telecommunications Advisory Committee.

January 2007.

FCC Independent Panel Reviewing the
Impact of Hurricane Katrina on Communications Networks. Federal Communications Commission Industry Panel. June 2006
Why Can’t We Talk? National Task Force on Interoperability. February 2003.

Final Report of the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee to the Federal Communications Commission. September 1996.

Public safety interoperable communications
topped the list of homeland security advisors’
concerns in 2007, as States continue to work to
ensure that first responders from various
agencies, jurisdictions, and levels of government
can speak to each other during emergencies or at
the scene of a disaster.

Source: National Governors Association 2007
State Homeland Security Directors Survey
IP-based networks enable first responders to
have the flexibility and tools they need for
effective response and … modernize their
existing radio networks so they work together
with other existing and future communications
networks and devices.

Source: The Joint Advisory Committee on
Communications Capabilities of Emergency
Medical and Public Health Care Facilities,
February 2008
1815
A – 25
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Federal Government Reports, Assessments, Plans, and Strategies Congress, White House, and Special Commissions
The National Strategy for Homeland Security. White
House Homeland Security Council. October 2007.

The Final Report of the Select Bipartisan Committee to
Investigate the Preparation for and Response to
Hurricane Katrina. Select Bipartisan Committee to
Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina, U.S. House of Representatives. February 2006.

The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons
Learned. White House Homeland Security Advisor.

February 2006.

The 9-11 Commission Report. The National Commission
on Terrorist Attacks. July 2004.

The Department of Homeland Security
The National Communications Capabilities Report. Department of Homeland Security, Office of Emergency Communications. March 2008.

Target Capabilities List: A Companion to the National Preparedness Guideline. Department of Homeland Security. September 2007.

National Incident Management System (NIMS). Department of Homeland Security. August 2007.

The National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP): Communications Sector Specific Plan.

Department of Homeland Security, Office of Infrastructure Protection. May 2007.

The National Infrastructure Protection Plan: Emergency Services. Department of Homeland Security, Office of Infrastructure Protection. May 2007.

Tactical Interoperable Communications Scorecards Summary Report. Department of Homeland Security. January 2007.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Disaster Emergency Communications (DEC) Program
Assessment. Department of Homeland Security, FEMA.

January 2007.

SAFECOM 2006: National Interoperability Baseline
Survey. Department of Homeland Security, SAFECOM
Program. December 2006.

Answering the Call: Communication Lessons Learned
from the Pentagon Attack. Department of Homeland
Security, Public Safety Wireless Network (PSWN) Program. January 2002.

The nation’s emergency communications
systems “must be resilient, either able
to withstand destructive forces regardless of
cause or sufficiently redundant to suffer
damage and remain reliable.

Source: The National Strategy for Homeland
Security, revised October 2007
Communications challenges across the Gulf
Coast region in Hurricane Katrina’s wake
were more a problem of basic operability,
than one of equipment or system
interoperability.

Source: Federal Response to Hurricane
Katrina: Lessons Learned, February 2006
2006 SAFECOM Survey—
– 66% of public agencies use interoperability
to some degree
– Interoperability at local levels tends to be
more advanced than between State and
local agencies
TICP Scorecards—
– 68% of urban metro areas had established
regional interoperability
– 80% of urban/metro areas use shared
systems and/or shared channels daily to
provide interoperability
1816
A – 26
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Appendix 8: Glossary of Terms
Agreements. Governance capability sub-element encompassing mechanisms approved to govern interagency coordination and the use of interoperable emergency communications solutions.

Continuity of Communications. Ability of emergency response agencies to maintain communications capabilities when primary infrastructure is damaged or destroyed.

Cross-Discipline. Involving emergency response providers from different disciplines (e.g., police, fire, EMS).

Cross-Jurisdiction. Involving emergency response providers from different jurisdictions (e.g., across State, county, or regional boundaries).

Decision-Making Groups. Governance capability sub-element that refers to a collection of public safety practitioners and leaders who pool their expertise to improve interoperable emergency communications.

Emergency Communications. Means and methods for transmitting and receiving information necessary for successful incident management, when needed and as authorized.

Exercises. Training and exercises capability sub-element encompassing emergency scenarios developed to establish proficiency in identifying communications resources needed and available, implementing processes and procedures, and leveraging solutions to effectively establish and maintain communications.

Funding. Governance capability sub-element encompassing the levels and reliability of financial resources available for one-time capital investments and recurring operating costs in support of interoperable emergency communications.

Frequency of Use and Familiarity. Usage capability sub-element encompassing the level of familiarity, proficiency, and frequency with which interoperable emergency communications solutions are activated and used.

Governance. Capability element that includes government leadership, decision-making groups, agreements, funding, and strategic planning.

Interoperability. Ability of emergency responders to communicate among jurisdictions, disciplines, frequency bands, and levels of government as needed and as authorized. System operability is required for system interoperability.

Jurisdiction. Geographical, political, or system boundary as defined by each State.

Leadership. Governance capability sub-element encompassing the involvement of government leaders and their commitment to ensuring the political and fiscal priority of interoperable emergency communications.
1817
A – 27
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008

Operability. Ability of emergency responders to establish and sustain communications in support of mission operations.

Operability Assurance. Process of ensuring that emergency response providers and government officials can continue to communicate in the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism, or other man-made disasters.

Policies, Practices, and Procedures. Standard operating procedures sub-element encompassing the range of formal and informal communications policies, practices, and procedures.

Private Sector Emergency Response Providers. Businesses and other nongovernmental organizations that provide emergency services in support of major incidents.

Response Level Emergency Communications. Capacity of individuals with primary operational leadership responsibility33 to manage resources and make timely decisions during a multi-agency incident without technical or procedural communications impediments. In addition to communicating to first-level subordinates in the field, the Operations Section Chief should be able to communicate upwards to the incident command level34 (e.g. between the Operations Section Chief and Incident Command). As the incident grows and transitions, Incident Command/Unified Command can move off scene and may require communication between Incident Command and off-scene EOCs, dispatch centers, and other support groups as appropriate.

Routine Incidents. Emergencies that happen on a regular basis. Examples of these types of events are further explained in the Usage element of the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum as planned events, localized emergency incidents, regional incident management (interstate or intrastate), and daily use throughout the region.

Significant Incidents. Interoperability and continuity of communications are the emphasis for response-level emergency communications during significant events. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8: National Preparedness (HSPD-8) sets forth 15 national planning scenarios that highlight a plausible range of significant events, such as terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies, that pose the greatest risk to the Nation. Any of these 15 scenarios should be considered when planning for a significant incident in which all major emergency communications infrastructure is destroyed.

Standard Operating Procedures. Capability element that includes the range of informal and formal policies, practices, and procedures that guide emergency responder interactions and the use of interoperable communications solutions.

Strategic Planning. Governance capability sub-element encompassing the disciplined efforts and processes to establish long-term goals and objectives for interoperable emergency communications.

System Functionality. Technology capability sub-element encompassing the range of fixed and mobile/deployable systems and equipment used for interoperable emergency communications and associated voice, data, and video capabilities.
33 As defined in the National Incident Command System 200 - Unit 2 - Leadership and Management. 34  As defined in the National Incident Management System, FEMA 501/Draft August 2007, p.47. 1818
A – 28
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
System Performance. Technology capability sub-element encompassing the availability, reliability, and scalability of communications systems and equipment.

Technology. Capability element that encompasses the systems and equipment that enable emergency responders to share information efficiently and securely during an emergency incident, and addresses the functionality, performance, interoperability, and continuity capabilities of those systems and equipment.

Training. Training and exercises capability sub-element encompassing the scope and frequency of educational activities related to interoperable emergency communications.

Training and Exercises. Capability element that includes educational activities and simulations conducted to help ensure that emergency responders know their roles and are properly prepared to respond to a wide range of emergencies.

Usage. Capability element that refers to the frequency and familiarity with which emergency responders use interoperable emergency communications solutions. 1819
A – 29
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
Appendix 9: Acronyms
AEL Authorized Equipment List
AES Advanced Encryption Standard
AFG Assistance to Firefighters Grants
APCO Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials–International APIC APCO Project 25 Interface Committee
AVL Automatic Vehicle Location
BBTG APIC Broadband Task Group
BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs
BORTAC Border Tactical Communications
CAI Common Air Interface
CAP Common Alerting Protocol
CAP Compliance Assessment Program
CASM Communications Asset Survey and Mapping Tool
CBP Customs and Border Protection
CCI Command, Control and Interoperability
CCP Citizen Corps Program
CDMA Code Division Multiple Access
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CIPAC Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council COG Continuity of Government
COML Communications Unit Leader
COMT Communications Unit Technicians
COOP Continuity of Operations
COP Committee of Principals
COPS Community Oriented Policing Services
CTCSS Continuous Tone Controlled Squelch System
DEC Disaster Emergency Communications
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DIRS Disaster Information Reporting System
DM Disaster Management
DoD Department of Defense
DOE Department of Energy
DOI Department of the Interior
DOJ Department of Justice
1820
A – 30
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
DOT Department of Transportation
DSCA Defense Support to Civil Authorities
EC/ERC Executive Committee/Emergency Response Council (SAFECOM) ECPC Emergency Communications Preparedness Center
EDXL Emergency Data Exchange Language
EMS Emergency Medical Services
EMT Emergency Medical Technician
EOC Emergency Operations Center
ESF Emergency Support Function
FAS Frequency Assignment Subcommittee
FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation
FCC Federal Communications Commission
FCD Federal Continuity Directive
FDMA Frequency Division Multiple Access
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIPS Federal Information Processing Standard
FLEWUG Federal Law Enforcement Wireless Users Group
FM Frequency Modulation
FPIC Federal Partnership for Interoperable Communications FY Fiscal Year
G&T Grants and Training
GETS Government Emergency Telecommunications Service
GPS Global Positioning System
GSM Global System for Mobile Communications
HAZMAT Hazardous Material
HF High Frequency
HSEEP Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program HSGP Homeland Security Grant Program
HSPD Homeland Security Presidential Directive
Hz Hertz
ICC Interoperable Communications Committee
ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement
ICP Incident Command Post
ICS Incident Command System
ICTAP Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program iDEN Integrated Digital Enhanced Network
1821
A – 31
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
IECGP Interoperable Emergency Communication Grant Program IGA Intergovernmental Agreement
IMSID Incident Management Systems Integration Division
IP Internet Protocol
IR Incident Response
IRAC Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee
IT Information Technology
IWN Integrated Wireless Network
JISCC Joint Incident Site Communications Capability
JITC Joint Interoperability Test Command
JNN Joint Network Nodes
JTRS Joint Tactical Radio System
kHz Kilohertz
LE Law Enforcement
LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee
LETPP Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program
LMR Land Mobile Radio
MAA Mutual Aid Agreement
MERS Mobile Emergency Response Support
MESA Mobility for Emergency and Safety Applications
MHz Megahertz
MMRS Metropolitan Medical Response System
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NAC Network Access Code
NCC National Coordinating Center for Telecommunications NCCC National Command and Coordination Capability
NCCR National Communications Capabilities Report
NCR National Capital Region
NCS National Communications System
NCSD National Communications System Directive
NECP National Emergency Communications Plan
NERCS National Emergency Responder Credentialing System NGB National Guard Bureau
NGO Nongovernmental Organization
NIC National Integration Center
NIEM National Information Exchange Model
1822
A – 32
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
NIFOG National Interoperability Field Operations Guide
NIJ National Institute of Justice
NIMS National Incident Management System
NIPP National Infrastructure Protection Plan
NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
NORTHCOM U.S. Northern Command
NPSPAC National Public Safety Planning Advisory Committee NPSTC National Public Safety Telecommunications Council NRF National Response Framework
NRP National Response Plan
NS/EP National Security and Emergency Preparedness
NSTAC National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee NTIA National Telecommunications and Information Administration NVOAD National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disasters O&M Operations and Maintenance
OCIO Office of the Chief Information Officer
OEC Office of Emergency Communications
OGC Office of General Counsel
OIC Office for Interoperability and Compatibility
P25 Project 25
PDA Personal Digital Assistant
PSAP Public Safety Answering Point
PSIC Public Safety Interoperable Communications Grant Program PSWAC Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee
PSWN Public Safety Wireless Network
PTT Push-to-Talk
QoS Quality of Service
R&D Research and Development
RADO Radio Operator
RDT&E Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation
RECCWG Regional Emergency Communications Coordination Working Group RF Radio Frequency
RoIP Radio over Internet Protocol
SBI Secure Border Initiative
SCIP Statewide Communication Interoperability Plan
SdoC Supplier’s Declaration of Compliance
SDR Software Defined Radio
1823
A – 33
National Emergency Communications Plan July 2008
SEL Standardized Equipment List
SHARES Shared Resources Program
SHSP State Homeland Security Program
SIEC Statewide Interoperability Executive Commitee
SME Subject Matter Expert
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
STR Strategic Technology Reserve
SWAT Special Weapons and Tactics
TCL Target Capabilities List
TDMA Time Division Multiple Access
TIA Telecommunications Industry Association
TICP Tactical Interoperable Communications Plan
TOPOFF Top Officials
TSP Telecommunications Service Priority
UA Urban Areas
UASI Urban Area Security Initiative
UCALL UHF Calling Channel
UHF Ultra High Frequency
ULS Universal Licensing System
UPS Uninterruptible Power Supply
USCG United States Coast Guard
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USFS United States Forest Service
UTAC UHF Talk Around Channel
VCALL VHF Calling Channel
VA Department of Veteran Affairs
VHF Very High Frequency
VoIP Voice over Internet Protocol
VTAC VHF Talk Around Channel
WIN-T Warfighter Information Network - Tactical
WPS Wireless Priority Service
1824
Motorola Confidential Restricted Contra Costa County Bid # 0904-018 Use or disclosure of this proposal is Project P-25 Professional Grade Portable Radios subject to the restrictions on the title page Updated-January 5, 2012 Pricing Summary Bid # 0904-018 1-1
Section 1. Pricing Summary Bid # 0904-018

1.1 Portables
MOTOROLA Unit Cost
Tier 1 P25 Portable
APX4000 II APX4000-II 1-3W 764-870MHZ P25 PORTABLE 512 CHANNELS $ 2,616.00 Phase 2 Capable H51UCF9PW6_N, QA02756
Includes iMPRES Battery (1900 mAH), antenna, T-O-T,
belt clip, 2 line-12 character front display and low battery alert, SmartZone P25 CAI software and I.D. Display, 9600 or 3600 control Options for APX4000:

Model III upgrade with Full Keypad $320.00
PoP25 Over-The-Air Reprogramming & IV&D $240.00
TDMA Phase 2 $320.00
Accessories:

Spare High-Capacity iMPRES NiMh Battery 1900 mAH) $88.00 Spare High-Capacity iMPRES NiMh Battery 2300 mAH) $106.00 Single Unit iMPRES Rapid charger $65.00
Multi (6) Unit Bank iMPRES Rapid charger (no display) $421.00 Leather Swivel Case with Belt Loop $48.00
Tier 2 P25 Portable
APX6000 I Li APX6000Li 1-3 W DIGITAL PORTABLE 700/800 96 CHANNELS $ 2,776.00 Phase 2 Capable H98UCD9PW5, QA02756
Includes: battery, belt clip, antenna, noise reduction software, P25 trunked software, Emergency button, top display w/8 characters, programmable buttons, Channel Announcement, 9600 or 3600 control
Options for APX6000:

Model I channel enhancement for 512 channels $60.00
Upgrade Model II w/ 870 Channels, Front Display & Limited Keypad $240.00 Upgrade Model III w/ 870 Channels, Front Display & Full Keypad $560.00 Upgrade Standard battery to Ultra High-Capacity $80.00
PoP-25 over the air programming & IV&D $240.00
1825
Contra Costa County Bid # 0904-018 Motorola Confidential Restricted Project P-25 Professional Grade Portable Radios Use or disclosure of this proposal is Updated-January 5, 2012 subject to the restrictions on the title page 1-2 Pricing Summary Bid # 0904-018
TDMA operation $320.00
APD Software Encryption N/C
Accessories:

Spare High-Capacity iMPRES NiMh Battery (2150 mAH) $107.00 Spare Ultra High-Capacity iMPRES NiMh Battery (2900 mAH) $119.00 Single Unit iMPRES Rapid charger $100.00
Multi (6) Unit Bank iMPRES Rapid charger (no display) $630.00 Multi (6) Unit Bank iMPRES Rapid charger (displays condition readout) $1,080.00 iMPRES Vehicular charger (FULL KIT) 312.00
Dual Unit iMPRES Rapid charger $295.00
Leather Swivel Case with Belt Loop $65.00
Leather Case with fixed Belt Loop $56.95
Plastic Carry holder with clip $24.65
“D” Button back and Belt Loop $35.70
Remote Spkr/Mic with earphone-jack (directional) $93.50 Remote Spkr/Mic with earphone-jack & Orange Emergency button $90.95 Tier 3 P25 Portables
APX6000 Model 1.5 APX6000Li 1-3 W DIGITAL PORTABLE 700/800 69 CHANNELS $ 3,132.00 Phase 2 Capable H98UCD9PW5-N, Q806, H38, Q361
Includes: battery, belt clip, antenna, noise reduction software, P25 trunked software, Emergency button, top display w/8 characters, programmable buttons, Channel Announcement, 9600 and 3600 control
Options for APX6000:

Model I channel enhancement for 512 channels $60.00
Upgrade Model II w/ 870 Channels, Front Display & Limited Keypad $240.00 Upgrade Model III w/ 870 Channels, Front Display & Full Keypad $560.00 Upgrade Standard battery to Ultra High-Capacity 2900 mAH $80.00 PoP-25 over the air programming & IV&D $240.00
Fire-XE Ruggedized portable upgrade $640.00
Impact Green or Yellow housing $20.00
TDMA operation $320.00
APD Software Encryption N/C
Accessories:

Spare High-Capacity iMPRES NiMh Battery (2150 mAH) $107.00 Spare Ultra High-Capacity iMPRES NiMh Battery (2900 mAH) $119.00 Single Unit iMPRES Rapid charger $100.00
Multi (6) Unit Bank iMPRES Rapid charger (no display) $630.00 Multi (6) Unit Bank iMPRES Rapid charger (displays battery’s condition) $1,080.00 iMPRES Vehicular charger (FULL KIT) $312.00
Dual Unit iMPRES Rapid charger $295.00
Leather Swivel Case with Belt Loop $65.00
Leather Case with fixed Belt Loop $56.95
1826
Motorola Confidential Restricted Contra Costa County Bid # 0904-018 Use or disclosure of this proposal is Project P-25 Professional Grade Portable Radios subject to the restrictions on the title page Updated-January 5, 2012 Pricing Summary Bid # 0904-018 1-3
Plastic Carry holder with clip $24.65
“D” Button back and Belt Loop $35.70
Remote Spkr/Mic with earphone-jack (directional) $93.50 Remote Spkr/Mic with earphone-jack & Orange Emergency button $90.95 1/4 WAVE antenna 7/800 Stubby (Single Band Only. Length: 3.93) $23.00 Multi Band P25
Portable
APX7000 - I APX7000 P25 PORTABLE RADIO 7/800 1-3W 1200 CHANNELS $ 3,957.00 Phase 2 Capable H97TGD9PW1-N, QA00570, QA00573, Q806, H38, Q361 Includes: battery, belt carry clip, dual band antenna, noise reduction software, P25 trunked software, top display w/8 characters, dual mics 1 watt speaker, Emergency button, programmable side buttons, SmartZone software, Channel Announcement, dual band capable, APD Software Encryption
Options for APX7000:

Upgrade Model III w/ 2000 Channels, Front Display & Full Keypad $400.00 Enable 2nd (dual) band operation (VHF or UHF) $800.00
PoP-25 over the air programming & IV&D $240.00
TDMA operation $320.00
BLUETOOTH software & board $240.00
GPS, internal operation $80.00
XE Rugged Upgrade for Fire Portable with FM approval, Ruggedized Housing, Enhanced Audio, Submersible and Extra Large Top Display $374.00 Impact Green or Yellow housing $20.00
Accessories:

Single Unit iMPRES Rapid charger $100.00
Multi (6) Unit Bank iMPRES Rapid charger (no display) $630.00 Multi (6) Unit Bank iMPRES Rapid charger (displays battery’s condition) $1,080.00 iMPRES Vehicular charger (FULL KIT) $312.00
Dual Unit iMPRES Rapid charger $295.00
Leather Swivel Case with Belt Loop $65.00
Leather Case with fixed Belt Loop $56.95
Plastic Carry holder with clip $24.65
“D” Button back and Belt Loop $35.70
Remote Spkr/Mic with earphone-jack (directional) $93.50 Remote Spkr/Mic with earphone-jack & Orange Emergency button $90.95 Fire-XE Remote Spkr/Mic, Green, Emergency Light & Button, volume control, water proof and dual mics for noise canceling $276.00 1/4 WAVE antenna 7/800 Stubby (Single Band Only. Length: 3.93) $23.00 1827
Contra Costa County Bid # 0904-018 Motorola Confidential Restricted Project P-25 Professional Grade Portable Radios Use or disclosure of this proposal is Updated-January 5, 2012 subject to the restrictions on the title page 1-4 Pricing Summary Bid # 0904-018

1.2 Mobiles
MOTOROLA Unit Cost
Tier 2 P25 Mobile
APX6500 APX6500 DIGITAL MOBILE RADIO 700/800 10-35W 870 CHANNELS $3,694.00 Phase 2 Capable M25URS9PW1, Q806, G51, G361, G442, G66, G3354, W22, B18 Includes: 1/4 wave antenna, 870 modes, Digital P25 trunking software, palm mic, 7.5 watt speaker, power cable & dash mount hardware, Emergency button, programmable buttons, 4 line/14 characters display “05” head
Options for APX6500:

Add remote mount control head option w/17' cables $138.00 Add Dual Head, spkr & mic, 17’ cables (requires remote mount option above) $575.00 Base Station option / desk mic and power supply (includes no antenna) $349.00 TDMA operation $320.00
PoP-25 over the air programming & IV&D $240.00
Tier 3 P25 Mobile
APX7500 APX7500 DIGITAL MOBILE RADIO VHF 10-45W 1250 CHANNELS $4,232.00 Phase 2 Capable
M30URS9PW1-N, G806, G51, Q361, G442, G444, G66, G335, B18, W22
Includes: 1/4 wave antenna, noise reduction software, 1250 modes,

7.5 watt speaker, power cable & dash mount hardware, palm mic, Digital P25 trunking software, 4 line/14 characters display “05” head five programmable buttons, Emergency button
Options for APX7500:

Add remote mount control head option w/17' cables $138.00 Motorcycle upgrade & remote mount (does not include weather proof housing) $241.00 Add Dual Head, spkr & mic, 17’ cables (requires remote mount option above) $575.00 Base Station option / desk mic and power supply (includes no antenna) $349.00 PoP-25 over the air programming with IV&D $240.00
TDMA operation $320.00
1828
Motorola Confidential Restricted Contra Costa County Bid # 0904-018 Use or disclosure of this proposal is Project P-25 Professional Grade Portable Radios subject to the restrictions on the title page Updated-January 5, 2012 Pricing Summary Bid # 0904-018 1-5
Multi Band P25 Mobile
APX7500 APX7500 DIGITAL MOBILE RADIO VHF 10-45W 1250 CHANNELS $4,552.00 Phase 2 Capable
M30TSS9PW1, G806, G51, Q361, G442, G444, G66, G335, B18, W22, GA003xx
Includes: 1/4 wave antenna, noise reduction software, 1250 modes,

7.5 watt speaker, power cable & dash mount hardware, palm mic, Digital P25 trunking software, 4 line/14 characters display “05” head five programmable buttons, Emergency button, Dual Band Ready Options for APX7500:

Enable 2nd (dual) band operation (7/800, VHF or UHF) $480.00 Add remote mount control head option w/17' cables $138.00 Motorcycle upgrade & remote mount (does not include weather proof housing) $241.00 Add Dual Head, spkr & mic, 17’ cables (requires remote mount option above) $575.00 Base Station option / desk mic and power supply (includes no antenna) $349.00 PoP-25 over the air programming with IV&D $240.00
TDMA operation $320.00
Motorola has based the unit pricing on an undefined quantity as provided in the RFQ specifications. Motorola may offer additional quantity discounts and promotion discounts to Contra Costa County and other agencies who wish to make purchases under this agreement based on a commitment to a large quantity purchase. For those purchases, a separate quote will be provided. “Public Agency Clause” Motorola agrees to offer equipment and contract prices contained within this RFQ to any other public agency (i.e., city, district, public authority, public agency, municipality and other political subdivision or public corporation of California) as stated in the agreement. Each Agency may contract directly through Motorola for equipment and services as required. 1829
Submitted to
EBRCSA
Submitted by
AECOM
20715 Timberlake Rd
Suite 106
Lynchburg, VA 24502
June 8, 2012
Final Coverage Acceptance Test
for Contra Costa County West
Simulcast Cell
1830
1831
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
1 Table of Contents
1 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 2 Definition and Process .......................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 Channel Performance Criterion (CPC) ....................................................................................................................... 6

2.2 Delivered Audio Quality .............................................................................................................................................. 6

2.3 Received Signal Strength Indication ........................................................................................................................... 6

2.4 Bit Error Rate .............................................................................................................................................................. 6

2.5 Service Area and Conditions ...................................................................................................................................... 6

2.6 Motorola Covered Area Reliability .............................................................................................................................. 8

2.7 Validated Service Area Reliability ............................................................................................................................... 9 3 System Test Equipment ...................................................................................................................................................... 10

3.1 The Test Set ............................................................................................................................................................. 10

3.2 The Test Sequences ................................................................................................................................................. 13

3.3 The Test Set Calibration ........................................................................................................................................... 13

3.4 RaCESM Equipment Setup ........................................................................................................................................ 13

3.5 EBRCSA Supplied Equipment .................................................................................................................................. 16 4 Test Method ........................................................................................................................................................................ 17

4.1 Test Mode ................................................................................................................................................................. 17

4.2 Test Samples ............................................................................................................................................................ 17

4.2.1 Test Message ....................................................................................................................................................... 17

4.2.2 Valid Test Sample ................................................................................................................................................ 17

4.2.3 Inaccessible Tile ................................................................................................................................................... 17

4.2.4 Tile Retries ........................................................................................................................................................... 18

4.2.5 Failed Tile ............................................................................................................................................................. 18

4.3 Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) Sample .................................................................................................. 18 5 System Requirements and Impact ...................................................................................................................................... 19

5.1 Testing System Requirements .................................................................................................................................. 19

5.2 Testing an Operational System ................................................................................................................................. 19

5.3 Radio Requirements ................................................................................................................................................. 19 6 Test Procedures .................................................................................................................................................................. 20

6.1 Testing System Requirements .................................................................................................................................. 20

6.2 Drive Test Areas ....................................................................................................................................................... 20

6.3 DAQ Measurements/Voice Recording ...................................................................................................................... 20

6.4 Frequencies, Talk Groups, and Control Channels .................................................................................................... 20

6.5 Stationary Unit Locations .......................................................................................................................................... 21

6.6 Stationary Unit Locations .......................................................................................................................................... 23

6.7 Data Collection, Storage and Post-Processing ......................................................................................................... 25 1832
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
2 6.8 Additional Procedures ............................................................................................................................................... 25

6.9 Post Processing ........................................................................................................................................................ 25

6.10 Inaccessible Tiles ..................................................................................................................................................... 25 7 Results ................................................................................................................................................................................ 26

7.1 Test Results ............................................................................................................................................................. 26

7.2 Detailed DAQ Test Results ....................................................................................................................................... 27

7.3 RSSI Test Results ................................................................................................................................................... 28

7.4 BER Test Results .................................................................................................................................................... 29

7.5 DAQ Test Data .......................................................................................................................................................... 29 8 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................................ 31 List of Appendices
Appendix A RaCESM & Test Vehicle Procedures
Appendix B EBRCSA Supplied Equipment
Appendix C Received Signal Strength threshold Calculations Appendix D Checklists
Appendix E Standard Harvard Phrases
Appendix F Detailed Results
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Delivered Audio Quality Definitions
Table 3-1 Attenuator Calculations
Table 3-2 Attenuator Calculations
Table 6-1 Contra Costa County West Frequencies
Table 6-2 Radio Sites in the Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell Table 7-1 DAQ Test Results – Covered Area Reliability
Table 7-2 DAQ Test Results – Service Area Reliability
Table 7-3 One-Way DAQ Test Results – Service Area
Table 7-4 One-Way DAQ Test Results – Covered Area
Table 7-5 RSSI Level
Table 7-6 BER Test Results
Table 7-7 Sample Excel Spreadsheet
Table C-1 Portable Radio RSSI Threshold Level Calculations Table C-2 Mobile Radio RSSI Threshold Level Calculation 1833
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
3 List of Figures
Figure 2-1 Contra Costa County West Service Area
Figure 2-2 Motorola Tested Tiles and AECOM Tested Tiles Figure 3-1 Mobile Unit Configuration
Figure 3-2 Stationary Unit Configuration
Figure 3-3 Attenuator Network
Figure 6-1 Relationship between Hotel and Nearest Site
Figure 6-2 Radio Sites in the Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell Figure 6-3 Photograph of Test Vehicle Setup
Figure 6-4 Photograph of Test Vehicle Antenna Location
Figure 7-1 DAQ Score Distribution
Figure 7-2 RSSI Level Distribution
Figure 7-3 Contra Costa County West Medium Building - Sector 1b Two-Way DAQ Test Figure 7-4 Contra Costa County West Portable On Street Two-Way DAQ Test Figure 7-5 Contra Costa County West Talk-In DAQ Test
Figure 7-6 Contra Costa County West Talk-Out DAQ Test
Figure 7-7 Contra Costa County West RSSI
Figure 7-8 Contra Costa County West Motorola BER
Figure 7-9 Contra Costa County West Channel Grant Failures Figure B-1 EBRCSA Supplied Equipment and Quantity
Figure D-1 Master Checklist
Figure D-2 Inventory Checklist
Figure D-3 Arrival Checklist
Figure D-4 Daily Checklist
Figure D-5 Mobile Unit Software Settings Checklist
Figure D-6 Software Settings Stationary Checklist
Figure D-7 Audio Levels
Figure D-8 Radio Interface Cable
Figure F-1 Contra Costa County West Sectors 1a+1b Two Tile Numbers 1834
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
4 1 Purpose
This Coverage Acceptance Test Report provides the East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA) a detailed report of the radio coverage testing conducted by AECOM in the Contra Costa County West (Contra Costa County West) simulcast cell. This test report describes the coverage testing methods and procedures, provides test documentation and results, the responsibilities AECOM, EBRCSA, and Motorola had during testing, and finally, provides our conclusions and recommendations.

AECOM’s Radio Coverage Evaluator (RaCESM)
1 was used to perform the Delivered Audio Quality (DAQ) Portable Outdoor and simulated indoor testing of the service area. DAQ testing collects talk-in and talk-out audio recordings and calculates Delivered Audio Quality (DAQ) values for each recorded test calls. The test evaluated the voice coverage performance under typical operating conditions within the Contra Costa County West service area using a mobile radio to simulate a portable radio operating at hip level. This automated test was conducted concurrently with Received Signal Strength Indication (RSSI) testing conducted by RaCESM. RSSI testing is an additional automated test.

Prior to DAQ testing, Motorola conducted BER testing using their Voyager℠ test equipment. AECOM had planned on collecting BER test data with RaCE, but due to limitations in Motorola’s Simulcast equipment, AECOM was unable to conduct BER testing.

Per the specifications developed by AECOM for EBRCSA, a DAQ of 3 is the minimum acceptable level for two-way voice operations in talk-in and talk-out directions. Motorola performed talk-out only a BER based test, with a BER of 2.6% as the maximum acceptable level. All RSSI testing was conducted for informational purposes only.

The following excerpts from the coverage sections of the EBRCSA Radio System Specifications (dated October 21, 2010) are included as an exhibit:

4.7 Coverage Requirements
“The guaranteed performance of this radio system is 95% coverage in both directions (talk-out and talk-in) within the covered area indicated on the propagation maps provided by Motorola. “When the entire system is completed and all of the standalone sites are fully integrated with the simulcast systems, a minimum level of 95% coverage of the specified type for both talk-out and talk-in directions, in all of the test sectors, shall be achieved in the “covered areas”. The reliability shall be calculated as a composite value for the two-county radio system by dividing the total number of passed tiles by the total number of tiles tested. In order to be counted as a “passed tile”, both the talk-in and talk-out DAQ values shall be equal or greater than 3. “4.7.1 Coverage Charts and Analysis
Motorola shall provide coverage charts in the proposal as supporting documentation. The coverage chart will be used as supporting documentation only and shall not be considered a part of confirming or guaranteeing that the system will meet the coverage specifications. Include a detailed description of the propagation models used and the assumptions made in preparation of the coverage charts included in your proposal.

Include an analysis of tower-top amplifier (TTA) system performance for those sites where TTA’s are included in the design.
“Coverage charts shall be provided for each Coverage Test Sector. The predicted coverage shall be overlaid on a map with the specified Coverage Test Sector clearly defined. The coverage chart shall identify all areas within the Coverage Test Sector that do not meet the specified requirement. Identified coverage deficiency areas in the Coverage Test Sector shall be taken into account when constructing the composite 95% boundary. All areas within the defined Coverage Test Sector shall be considered equal when selecting random coverage test locations.

1 U.S. Patent # 7,522,978 B2
1835
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
5 “4.7.2 Building Loss Factors
All of the Coverage Test Sectors require in-building portable radio coverage. In these Coverage Test Sectors, a Building Loss Factor will be inserted in the test setup to simulate building penetration losses.

Building Loss Factors are defined below:

Building
Characterization
Building Loss
Factor (dB)
Residential 6
Medium Building 15
Heavy Building 20
“4.7.3 Service Area and Coverage Test Sectors
The service area for the EBRCS is defined by the boundaries of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. “4.7.3.1 Contra Costa County West Region
The Contra Costa West Region is bounded on the north, west, and south by the county borders. On the east, the line will run south from Crockett (with Crockett inside the test zone), curving east to fully encapsulate Hercules, and then curving back west to run along the western shore of the San Pablo Reservoir, then south to the border with Alameda County. The region contains two test sectors, which completely cover the region.

Test sector 1a: Contra Costa West, Portable on Street (6 dB loss) – includes the entire region described above minus test sector 1b described below.

Test sector 1b: Richmond, Portable in Medium Building (15 dB loss): includes the Cities of Richmond and El Cerrito. This test sector is defined in the Motorola provided shape files named Contra Costa West 7 (The Jail) and Contra Costa West 13.”
1836
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
6 2 Definition and Process

2.1 Channel Performance Criterion (CPC)
The channel performance criterion (CPC) is the specified design performance in a faded channel.

2.2 Delivered Audio Quality
Delivered audio quality (DAQ) designations are defined by TIA/EIA TSB-88.1-C and reproduced below in Table 2-1.

Note: DAQ-0 is not defined by TSB-88.1-C: AECOM has added this definition to account for instances where communications failed entirely. For example, a test in which the mobile unit was unable to obtain a channel grant would receive a DAQ score of 0.

Table 2-1 Delivered Audio Quality

2.3 Received Signal Strength Indication
Received signal strength indication (RSSI) is the radio signal strength measured in microvolts (μV) or in decibels in relation to 1 milliwatt at the input to the receiver (dBm). No acceptance criterion for RSSI has been provided for this test.

2.4 Bit Error Rate
Bit Error Rate is the ratio of erroneous bits received to the total number of bits transmitted, usually expressed as a percent.

2.5 Service Area and Conditions
The service area defines or describes the area in which a radio system should provide the desired CPC.

Delivered Audio Quality Performance Definition
Static SINAD equivalent
intelligibility
Not defined within
TIA TSB-88
DAQ-1 Unusable, speech present but unreadable < 8 dB
DAQ-2
Understandable with considerable effort frequent
repetition due to noise and distortion 12 ± 4 dB
DAQ-3
Speech understandable with slight effort;
occasional repetition required due to noise and
distortion; 17 ± 5 dB
DAQ-3.4
Speech understandable with repetition only rarely
required; some noise and distortion; 20 ± 5 dB
DAQ-4
Speech easily understood; occasional noise and
distortion 25 ± 5 dB
DAQ-4.5
Speech easily understood; infrequent noise and
distortion 30 ± 5 dB
DAQ-5 Speech easily understood > 33 dB
DAQ-0 No speech detected
1837
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
7 The Contra Costa County West service area is divided into two test sectors: 1a and 1b, shown in Figure 2-1. Test sector 1b is a developed area, and requires portable radio in medium building coverage, defined as 15 dB of additional loss when compared with operating a portable radio on the street. To simulate testing inside medium buildings, testing was conducted using a portable-on-street setup with an added 15 dB loss. Test sector 1a was tested as a portable radio on the street.

Figure 2-1 Contra Costa County West Service Area

1838
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
8 2.6 Motorola Covered Area Reliability
Based on their coverage predictions, Motorola has defined an area within Contra Costa County West over which its radio system is predicted to provide 95% area reliability. This is defined as the Motorola Covered Area, and is what was tested for system acceptance. This area is shown as tiles with a red outline in Figure 2-2 (“Motorola Covered Area”). Not all of these tiles are vehicle accessible. In addition to performing DAQ and RSSI testing in the Motorola Covered Area, AECOM tested all accessible tiles within the jurisdictional area. Tiles that AECOM was able to access and gather test data are shown in Figure 2- 2 (“AECOM Tested Tiles”).

Figure 2-2 Motorola Covered Area and AECOM Tested Tiles

1839
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
9 2.7 Validated Service Area Reliability
Coverage testing is a statistical process. Validated service area reliability is determined on the basis of measuring a statistically significant number of random test locations, uniformly distributed throughout the entire service area.

Validated service area reliability is the percentage of locations where talk-in and talk out radio communications meets or exceeds the desired CPC. The validated service area reliability value in percent is calculated by dividing the number of valid test measurements within the defined service area that meet or exceed the required CPC by the total number of valid test measurements.

As the system acceptance is based on the covered area reliability, the validated service area reliability is provided for information only.
1840
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
10 3 System Test Equipment

3.1 The Test Set
RaCESM test set consisted of two units: a stationary and a mobile unit. For details on installation, see section 6.

The RaCESM mobile unit (Figure 3-1) consists of the following equipment:
 Mobile radio (700/800MHz APX-7500, supplied by EBRCSA)  Two RSSI Receivers (ICOM, provided with RaCESM)
 Mobile antenna for each of the above radios (supplied by EBRCSA)  GPS receiver and antenna for measuring test vehicle location and establishing universal time  A laptop computer running AECOM’s RaCESM software
 Interconnecting hardware and cables
 An attenuation network consisting of a circulator and several attenuators to give the Motorola APX-7500 mobile the simulated characteristics of a portable radio worn on the hip, located either on the street or in medium buildings (depending on the test sector).

1841
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
11 Figure 3-1 Mobile Unit Configuration
The RaCESM stationary unit (Figure 3-2) consists of the following equipment:
 Mobile Radio (700/800MHz APX-7500, supplied by EBRCSA)  Mobile antenna (supplied by EBRCSA)
 A GPS receiver and antenna for timing correlation
 A laptop computer running AECOM’s RaCESM software
 Interconnecting hardware and cables

1842
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
12 Figure 3-2 Stationary Unit Configuration

1843
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
13 3.2 The Test Sequences
The DAQ test sequence was:
 The mobile system keeps track of its location and which tiles have already been tested  When the mobile test system recognizes that it has entered an untested tile, the mobile test system transmits a recorded message to the stationary test system.
 The stationary system receives the mobile’s message and records it.  After the mobile system finishes transmitting, the stationary system transmits a recorded message to the mobile system.  The mobile system receives and records the stationary system’s test message and RSSI measurements.  The mobile system marks the tile as having been tested.

3.3 The Test Set Calibration
Motorola was responsible for the programming and calibration of all mobile radios.

RaCESM includes a proprietary algorithm that evaluates DAQ based on added noise or distortion in the received audio of the RaCESM test message. DAQ is not based on signal strength or on bit error rate. Using telecommunication professionals, AECOM has calibrated the effects of noise or distortion on DAQ scores. AECOM then used this input to validate the proprietary algorithm inherent in the RaCESM software.

3.4 RaCESM Equipment Setup
AECOM developed the connector interfaces to the test radios. RaCESM uses the input to the microphone as the point at which to inject the audio signal for the test call. The output to the speakers is the point at which the received audio signal is sent to the RaCESM computer for recording and DAQ scoring. The connector for the test radio contains these points, and served as the interface to the RaCESM mobile and stationary units. We integrated the test radios to the RaCESM equipment in our lab, and adjusted the audio levels for optimum radio performance in a laboratory setting. Standard connectors, supplied with the test radios by BERCSA, enabled us to build the interface cabling between the RaCESM stationary and mobile units and the test radios.

Using the interface cables, we configured the RaCESM mobile unit and the RaCESM stationary unit with an EBRCSA supplied radio. Mobile radios were used for both the RaCESM mobile and stationary units. We then tested each system (mobile + stationary units) for all required test functions on the bench in our lab.

After the bench testing was complete, the RaCESM mobile and stationary systems were shipped to Contra Costa County, where the mobile was installed in the test vehicle, and the stationary installed in the hotel. The RaCESM operator then conducted a road test lasting approximately two hours. All functions to be used in the coverage test were checked during this road test.

To test portable on street coverage with a mobile radio, AECOM installed an attenuator network in the mobile test unit. The attenuator network was designed to simulate portable radio antenna mounted on the hip and, in the medium building coverage zone, in-building conditions. Figure 3-3 is a diagram of the attenuator network used to emulate portable radio receives (TalkOut) and transmits (Talk-In) under various coverage levels.

1844
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
14 Figure 3-3 Attenuator Network
Table 3-1 provides the calculations for each attenuator for simulating portable-on-street radio performance. It consists of three attenuators. Attenuator 1 is set to compensate for differences in receive system sensitivity of the typical radio being simulated and the test radio. Attenuator 2 is set to compensate for differences in transmit power of the typical radio being simulated and the test radio. Attenuator 3 is set to simulate the level of in-building coverage. When testing Test Sector 1b, which required portable radio in medium building coverage, attenuator 3 was 15 dB, as shown in Table 3-2.

1845
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
15 Actual attenuation used during portable on street testing was measured at 8 dB for the talk-in path, and 14 dB for the talk-out path.

Receiver Sensitivity
Portable Radio Being Simulated (XTS 2500) 0.25 µV -119.0 dB Test Radio (XTL 2500) 0.25 µV -119.0 dB
Difference 0.0 dB
Antenna System Gain
Test Set Antenna System
Mobile Antenna 0.0 dB
Mobile Coax -0.8 dB
Circulator -0.5 dB
Total -1.3 dB
Portable Radio Antenna System Being Simulated (Hip-Mounted Portable) -8.5 dB Difference 7.2 dB
Attenuator 1 7.2 dB
Building Attenuation Being Simulated (Attenuator 3) 0.0 dB Total Test Set Receive System Attenuation
(Attenuators 1 + 3 + Circulator) 7.7 dB
Transmit Power
Test Radio (XTL 2500) 10.0 W 40.0 dBm
Portable Radio Being Simulated (XTS 2500) 3.0 W 34.8 dBm Difference 5.2 dB
Antenna System Gain
Test Set Antenna System -1.3 dB
Portable Radio Antenna System Being Simulated (Hip-Mounted Portable) -8.5 dB Difference 7.2 dB
Attenuator 1 + Attenuator 2 12.4 dB
Attenuator 2 5.2 dB
Total Transmit Attenuation
(Attenuators 1 + 2 + 3 + Circulator) 12.9 dB
Table 3-1
Attenuator Calculations
Attenuation Required to Simulate a Portable Radio Transmit (Talk-In) Attenuation Required to Simulate Portable Radio Receive (Talk-Out) 1846
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
16 Actual attenuation used during portable in medium building testing was measured at 20 dB for the talk-out path, and 27 dB for the talk-in path.

3.5 EBRCSA Supplied Equipment
See Appendix C for the list of the EBRCSA supplied equipment used in the Contra Costa County West testing.

Receiver Sensitivity
Portable Radio Being Simulated (XTS 2500) 0.25 µV -119.0 dB Test Radio (XTL 2500) 0.25 µV -119.0 dB
Difference 0.0 dB
Antenna System Gain
Test Set Antenna System
Mobile Antenna 0.0 dB
Mobile Coax -0.8 dB
Circulator -0.5 dB
Total -1.3 dB
Portable Radio Antenna System Being Simulated (Hip-Mounted Portable) -8.5 dB Difference 7.2 dB
Attenuator 1 7.2 dB
Building Attenuation Being Simulated (Attenuator 3) 15.0 dB Total Test Set Receive System Attenuation
(Attenuators 1 + 3 + Circulator) 22.7 dB
Transmit Power
Test Radio (XTL 2500) 10.0 W 40.0 dBm
Portable Radio Being Simulated (XTS 2500) 3.0 W 34.8 dBm Difference 5.2 dB
Antenna System Gain
Test Set Antenna System -1.3 dB
Portable Radio Antenna System Being Simulated (Hip-Mounted Portable) -8.5 dB Difference 7.2 dB
Attenuator 1 + Attenuator 2 12.4 dB
Attenuator 2 5.2 dB
Total Transmit Attenuation
(Attenuators 1 + 2 + 3 + Circulator) 27.9 dB
Table 3-2
Attenuator Calculations
Attenuation Required to Simulate Portable Radio Receive (Medium Building Talk-Out) Attenuation Required to Simulate a Portable Radio Transmit (Medium Building Talk-In) 1847
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
17 4 Test Method

4.1 Test Mode
A gridded test determined test points and collect data for coverage acceptance testing.

In the gridded test mode, the area to be tested was divided into equally sized rectangular tiles. Testing large number of tiles is necessary to provide a statistically valid measurement of the overall system performance.

Motorola provided the shape file2
for the test tiles. The tile size was approximately 0.25 miles x 0.25 miles, with the total area defined as 50 tiles wide (x-axis) numbered 0 through 50, and 98 tiles high (y-axis) numbered 0 through 97. Tile 0,0 was the south-west corner of the grid. These test tiles were used by AECOM for the DAQ and RSSI testing.

During the test, the mobile unit was driven throughout the service area, in an effort to enter every tile. As the mobile unit entered a tile, the RaCESM software established whether that tile had been tested before, and if not, it activated the test sequence beginning with the talk-in transmission. The stationary unit recorded the talk-in transmission and then initiated the talk-out transmission. The mobile unit recorded the talk-out transmission along with RSSI data during the talk-out transmission and waited until a new, untested tile was entered before automatically beginning a new test.

4.2 Test Samples
A RaCESM DAQ test sample for EBRCSA testing is a paired set of talk-in and talk-out audio recordings.

4.2.1 Test Message
Test messages of five to eight seconds were used for coverage testing. Two hundred messages from lists included in Appendix E were selected for use during test. The selected list numbers are: 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 16, 18, 19, 24, 28, 34, 38, 39, 46, 47, 50, 53, and 56. The randomly sorted messages were half and half male and female voices.

4.2.2 Valid Test Sample
A valid test sample is one in which all of the following conditions apply:
 RaCESM detected entry into a previously untested tile and initiated the test sequence.  No RaCESM hardware or software failures occurred during the test sequence.  No operator errors occurred during the test sequence.  No busy signal occurred during the test sequence.
 No errant GPS data3
was received and used by RaCE SM during the test sequence.

If any of the above conditions were violated, the test sample is invalid and the tile is considered untested.

4.2.3 Inaccessible Tile
For tiles that were accessible but were missed for any reason, AECOM went back and attempted to test the tile.

2 A shape file is a popular geospatial vector data format for geographic information systems software. Shape files can be created and read by ESRI (and other) software. Shape files are actually several related files that convey geospatial data. 3 Obviously errant GPS data is a stated position more than 100 meters (~330 feet) from the actual position. This deviation is based on both the accuracy in the civilian GPS course / acquisition (C/A) code and the potential error in the underlying geographical map data in the vehicle. 1848
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
18 4.2.4 Tile Retries
Tile retries were performed only where an invalid test sample was collected (see 4.2.2). In these cases, RaCESM operators invalidated the data, and performed a re-test of the tile.

4.2.5 Failed Tile
A failed tile is any tile in which:
 A valid test sample was collected (see 4.2.2), and;
 Either the talk-out or the talk-in DAQ score is less than 3, or does not exist.

4.3 Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) Sample
RSSI data for the control channel was collected on a per tile basis, concurrent with the DAQ talk-out test.

The mobile test unit had two additional auxiliary receivers and antennas to perform RSSI measurements. During the talk-out test transmission, the RSSI receivers collect samples based on the automatic gain control line from the receiver. Multiple samples are collected in each tile, at an average rate of 57 samples per second. The median value of these samples is used, and then the average of the median value from each of the two receivers is presented as the RSSI value for that tile. The dynamic range of the ICOM receiver is -55 dBm to -120 dBm with a 1 dB resolution. 1849
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
19 5 System Requirements and Impact

5.1 Testing System Requirements
During RaCESM testing on a trunked system, interruption by other radio users on the same talk-group during RaCESM testing will disrupt the test results. Therefore, we require a dedicated talk group for testing be programmed into the radios and into the system manager. For additional protection, this test talk group can be partitioned to a single, dedicated working channel. This will eliminate outside influences on the test data (e.g., system “busies”). If the RaCESM test is assigned channels randomly (i.e., non-partitioned), the test results may not be as useful due to the different characteristics of the individual transmitters and antennas. Also, RaCESM performs best when only the RaCESM test talk group is using the partitioned channel, as this eliminates potential blocking or queuing by other users.

Under no circumstances can any work be done at any of the transmitter sites concurrent with the testing. If system failures occur, or if maintenance is required at the radio sites, the coverage testing will be stopped. Re-start of the test will then be coordinated with EBRCSA. It may be that some of the earlier test data was corrupted, and that some or all of the previous testing will have to be repeated.

All of these testing requirements were met, and we experienced none of the issues highlighted above. The test talk group was not partitioned to a specific channel because AECOM was the only user on the system during testing.

5.2 Testing an Operational System
When RaCESM is used in a system without a dedicated channel available, the RaCESM units are subject to the same operational limits as any other radios on the system. The effects on testing and operations can be significant. During this coverage acceptance testing, the dedicated talk-group on the trunked P25 system should not be accessible to any user, even for monitoring. Heavy use of the system by other users also poses the potential for queuing, which will corrupt the coverage test data. Under these circumstances, we will stop the test and coordinate the re-start with EBRCSA.

The system was not in operational use at the time of testing, and we experienced no busy signals.

5.3 Radio Requirements
EBRCSA supplied the radios used by RaCESM. See the equipment list for the radios required. Each radio was programmed with talk-groups that were utilized for the testing and a simplex (talk-around) frequency for diagnostics and setup of the test equipment.
1850
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
20 6 Test Procedures

6.1 Testing System Requirements
AECOM deployed one (1) drive test team for the testing. The test team consisted of one AECOM employee to operate the RaCESM equipment. EBRCSA provided the driver and the vehicle. Testing was overseen by an AECOM Engineer in Lynchburg, VA.

AECOM tested from 8 am - 5pm Monday through Friday. Progress reports were provided to EBRCSA on the following day.

6.2 Drive Test Areas
The Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell was divided into two zones, one portable on street, and one medium building.

Each was tested at the appropriate attenuation level.

The test team tested every accessible tile.

6.3 DAQ Measurements/Voice Recording
The DAQ measurements were collected using one vehicle with RaCESM set up as discussed in Section 3-1. RaCESM software was configured to provide indications on the computer that both talk-in and talk-out test calls were collected in each tile. Tile samples not meeting this requirement were considered not tested by the software, and were retested as described in section

4.2.5. The RaCESM operator continually monitored the GPS-indicated position on the laptops and validated this position by having the driver indicate road intersections. If GPS positions were found to be inaccurate, the tester invalidated the test, performed a manual position update, and then retested the grid.

6.4 Frequencies, Talk Groups, and Control Channels
The Control Channel was on 853.7500 MHz for the duration of the testing. AECOM’s testing was performed on the “AECOM” talk group. The radios were also programmed with “TAC – AECOM T/A” for simplex operation. The AECOM talk group was not limited to any particular working channels. The following frequencies were utilized by the system during testing:

Table 6-1 Contra Costa County West Frequencies
Channel Base TX (MHz) Base RX (MHz) Function
Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 1 853.7500 808.7500 Control Channel / Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 2 853.7375 808.7375 Control Channel / Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 3 853.3000 808.3000 Control Channel / Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 4 853.2875 808.2875 Control Channel / Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 5 852.9375 807.9375 Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 6 852.9250 807.9250 Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 7 852.6215 807.6215 Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 8 852.6000 807.6000 Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 9 851.3625 806.3625 Voice Channel Contra Costa County West Cell Channel 10 851.3500 806.3500 Voice Channel / Base Station Identifier 1851
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
21 6.5 Stationary Unit Locations
The stationary unit was located at the Courtyard Marriott Richmond. This location was selected because of its proximity to the Pearl Ridge Reservoir Site. The RaCE stationary unit was located in room 512, on the fifth floor. During setup, received signal strength of the control channel for the simulcast cell was measured between -56 and -62 dBm, with the received signal from the Pearl Ridge Reservoir site sufficiently stronger than the other sites to provide a capture effect.

1852
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
22 Figure 6-1 Relationship between Hotel and Nearest Site The hotel is located at 37.978N, 122.323W. The distance between the hotel and the Pearl Ridge Reservoir site is 1.51 miles at a heading of 156.61 degrees. The next closest site is Turquoise, which is 3.15 miles away, at a heading of 69.44 degrees.

1853
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
23 Figure 6-2 Radio Sites in the CCCO West Simulcast Cell Table 6-2 Radio Sites in the Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell

6.6 Stationary Unit Locations
The test vehicle for the mobile installation was a Ford Crown Victoria, provided by EBRCSA. AECOM installed the mobile equipment on June 17, 2011 and performed a checkout test to ensure proper operation. The equipment remained installed for the duration of the testing.

Name Latitude Longitude
Elevation
AMSL (m) ERP (W)
TX Ant
Azimuth (deg) TX Ant Model
TX Ant Ht
to Tip (m)
Turquoise 37-59-35.8 N 122-16-11.4 W 173.4 182.0 N/A Antel BCD-80010-3-25 17.2 El Cerrito PD 37-54-58.7 N 122-18-39.9 W 21.0 218.0 350 Antel BCR-80013-25 15.6 Pearl Ridge Reservoir 37-57-27.2 N 122-18-44.7 W 201.0 182.0 N/A Antel BCD-80010-5-25 21.7 Nickols Knob 37-55-13.0 N 122-22-55.0 W 113.1 75.0 N/A TX RX 101D-90-06-03N 15.1 1854
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
24 Figure 6-3 Photograph of Test Vehicle Setup

1855
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
25 Photograph showing the roof of the test vehicle with GPS antenna, mobile radio antenna, two RSSI receiver antennas, as well as two permanent antennas not related to RaCESM testing.

Figure 6-4 Photograph of Test Vehicles Antenna Location

6.7 Data Collection, Storage and Post-Processing
At the end of each test day, all RaCESM test data was copied from the mobile and stationary laptops to an external hard drive.

Data also remained on the original laptop computer.

6.8 Additional Procedures
See APPENDIX A: RaCESM PROCEDURES for additional test procedures.

6.9 Post Processing
AECOM listened to any test .wav file with a DAQ score of 3 or lower, and a sample of scores above 3. AECOM recommends that EBRCSA listen to any test .wav files that scored below a 3 DAQ. AECOM also recommends that EBRCSA samples 1% of the .wav files with a DAQ above 3.

6.10 Inaccessible Tiles
Certain tiles inside the test sectors 1a and 1b were inaccessible to vehicles, and were therefore not tested. These include some of the coastal areas, the area southwest of the San Pablo Canal, a large portion of the northern part of the test area, the foothills on the eastern end of the test area, and the Wildcat Canyon Regional Park. 1856
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
26 7 Results
Conformance testing relies on statistics over a large area, by measuring a statistically significant number of random test locations, uniformly distributed throughout the defined area. Tests are usually conducted throughout either a service area, which is the entire area where the radio system will be used, or a covered area, which is the area that is predicted to have coverage based on the design. For this test, DAQ and BER results pertaining to the covered area reliability are what determine whether the system passes the test. DAQ results pertaining to the service area reliability and RSSI results are provided for information only.

Reliability is defined as the percentage of locations to and from which radio communications meets or exceeds the desired CPC. For the covered area reliability test, the validated covered area reliability value in percent is calculated by dividing the number of valid test measurements within the covered area that that meet or exceed the required CPC by the total number of valid tests within the covered area. The validated service area reliability value in percent is calculated by dividing the number of valid test measurements within the service area that meet or exceed the required CPC by the total number of valid test measurements in the service area.

7.1 Test Results
From the specifications, the coverage guarantee for the system is a covered area reliability of 95% or higher. In order to meet this, 95% of tests must meet or exceed the Channel Performance Criteria (CPC) of DAQ 3 in both talk-in and talk-out directions. The covered area reliability is shown for both medium building attenuation (test sector 1b) and portable on street attenuation (test sector 1a).

Table 7-1 DAQ Test Results – Covered Area Reliability
Table 7-1 shows the results of the covered area reliability DAQ test. Tiles where a test was attempted but could not be completed due to inability to access the system from that location are included as tested tiles with a DAQ score of 0.

From these results, we see that Motorola has exceeded the specified coverage.

Additional test results are provided below for information only.

Pass Fail Total %
1a 366 1 367 99.7%
1b 257 0 257 100.0%
Test Sector Covered Area Reliability: Two-Way DAQ
1857
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
27 7.2 Detailed DAQ Test Results
Table 7-2 DAQ Test Results – Service Area Reliability
Table 7-2 shows the results of the Service Area Reliability DAQ test. Tiles where the test system was unable to gain system access were counted as failures. Tiles with an incomplete test sequence, as defined in section 4.2, were omitted from these results.

Table 7-3 One-Way DAQ Test Results – Service Area
Table 7-3 shows the one-way DAQ test results for both test sectors in the service area.

Table 7-4 One-Way DAQ Test Results – Covered Area
Table 7-4 shows the one-way DAQ test results for both test sectors in the covered area only.

Detailed DAQ test results can be found in Appendix F: Composite Results, and are displayed in Figure 7-3 (Medium Building [Sector 1b] Two-way DAQ Test), Figure 7-4 (Portable on Street [Sector 1a] Two-way DAQ Test), Figure 7-5 (RaCE Talk-In Delivered Audio Quality), and Figure 7-6 (RaCE Talk-Out Delivered Audio Quality). Tiles in which DAQ test was attempted but a channel grant could not be obtained are shown in Figure Figure 7-3 shows only the results from tiles inside the Motorola covered area. The rest of the maps display data from tiles in the service area.

Pass Fail Total %
1a 512 10 522 98.1%
1b 268 0 268 100.0%
Service Area Reliability: Two-Way DAQ Test Sector
Pass Fail Total % Pass Fail Total %
1a 514 8 522 98.5% 516 5 521 99.0%
1b 268 0 268 100.0% 268 0 268 100.0%
Test Sector Service Area Reliability: Talk-In DAQ Service Area Reliability: Talk-out DAQ Pass Fail Total % Pass Fail Total %
1a 367 0 367 100.0% 366 1 367 99.7%
1b 257 0 257 100.0% 257 0 257 100.0%
Test Sector Covered Area Reliability: Talk-In DAQ Covered Area Reliability: Talk-Out DAQ 1858
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
28 Figure 7-1 DAQ Score Distribution
Figure 7-1 shows the frequency with which each DAQ score was observed over the entire service area. This chart only includes tests where the mobile unit was able to obtain a channel grant. 99.4% of the scores are DAQ 3.4 or above, and

91.9% of the scores are DAQ 4 or above.

7.3 RSSI Test Results
AECOM’s RSSI data was collected without any added attenuation, to provide measurements as close as possible to the ambient signal level present at that location. In analyzing the data, AECOM has used the following cutoffs to organize the RSSI data: successful mobile radio (using a mobile radio with a receive sensitivity of -119 dBm) communications will generally require a RSSI of at least -108.55 dBm, portable on street will generally require a RSSI of at least -99.18 dBm, portable in light building will generally require a RSSI of at least -93.18 dBm, and portable radio in medium building will generally require a RSSI of at least -84.18 dBm. All of these values are RSSI as measured by a mobile radio outdoors.

Table 7-5 RSSI Level

0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1 2 3 3.4 4 4.5 5
Frequency
DAQ
DAQ Score Distribution
Talk‐in DAQ Scores
Talk‐Out DAQ Scores
Medium
Building
Light
Building
Portable
on Street
Mobile
Only No Coverage Total
≥-84.18 ≥ -93.18 ≥-99.18 ≥ -108.55 <-108.55
1a 392 76 31 17 3 519
1b 265 3 0 0 0 268
Received Signal Strength in dBm
Test Sector
1859
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
29 Figure 7-2 RSSI Level Distribution
Figure 7-2 shows the distribution of RSSI scores.

Detailed RSSI test results can be found in Appendix F: Composite Results, and are displayed in Figure 7-7, RaCE Receive Signal Strength Indicator.

7.4 BER Test Results
AECOM did not perform BER testing; however, Motorola’s BER test results are included for ease of reference. The BER CPC is that the BER must be equal to or below 2.6%, and Motorola’s coverage guarantee is that 95% of the tests will meet or exceed the CPC.

Table 7-6 BER Test Results
Table 7-6 shows the BER test results collected by Motorola. BER testing was only performed in the Motorola Covered Area.

Detailed BER test results can be found in Appendix F: Composite Results, and are displayed in Figure 7-8, Motorola BER.

7.5 DAQ Test Data
RaCESM data includes:
 Mobile unit latitude and longitude
 Talk-In calculated DAQ (from the mobile) – date and time stamped 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 ‐112‐110‐108‐106‐104‐102‐100
‐98‐96‐94‐92‐90‐88‐86‐84‐82‐80‐78‐76‐74‐72‐70‐68‐66‐64‐62‐60‐58‐56‐54‐52‐50‐48‐46‐44‐44 Frequency
RSSI Level(dBm)
RSSI Distribution
Pass Fail Total %
1a 365 2 367 99.5%
1b 257 0 257 100.0%
Test Sector
Covered Area
1860
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
30  Talk-Out calculated DAQ (from the stationary position) – date and time stamped  Talk-in and Talk-out received audio records (recorded as .wav files)  Talk-in and Talk-out reference audio records (recorded as .wav files)  Audio message used for each test direction (talk-in and talk-out)  Time the audio file was recorded
 RSSI value collected by AECOM
 Grid Reference number for each gridded test tile
 Which test sector the tile was part of
 Whether the tile was in Motorola’s covered area, or just the service area Using the data above, the following information is provided for post processing, as shown in the sample Excel spreadsheet in Table 7-7 below.

Table 7-7 Sample Excel Spreadsheet
The data spreadsheet is in Microsoft Excel format. The .wav files contain a link to the collected audio file for that test and will play when selected.

Wave File Direction Start Time Latitude Longitude Grid_Ref_Str DAQ_Score 00001.wav talk-in 2/6/2008 17:24 37.338487 -79.240112 4,4 3.9 00002.wav talk-out 2/6/2008 17:24 37.338475 -79.240138 5,4 3.5 00003.wav talk-in 2/6/2008 17:32 37.342162 -79.23593 5,5 3.4 00004.wav talk-out 2/6/2008 17:32 37.343645 -79.234908 5,6 3.7 00005.wav talk-in 2/6/2008 17:33 37.339798 -79.226513 4,6 3.5 00006.wav talk-out 2/6/2008 17:33 37.338575 -79.223762 4,7 3.8 00007.wav talk-in 2/6/2008 17:33 37.337398 -79.221977 5,7 3.9 00008.wav talk-out 2/6/2008 17:33 37.335903 -79.21969 6,7 3.4 1861
San Francisco
Berkeley Oakland
Vallejo
Richmond
Pinole
Hercules
Albany
El Cerrito
Orinda
San Pablo
El Sobrante
Benicia
RRooddeeoo
CCrroocckkeetttt
TTiibbuurroonn
KKeennssiinnggttoonn
TTaarraa HHiillllss
BBaayyvviieeww--MMoonnttaallvviinn
EEaasstt RRiicchhmmoonndd HHeeiigghhttss
RRoolllliinnggwwoooodd
PPoorrtt CCoossttaa
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
UV123
UV4
UV24
UV123
UV4 UV4
UV123
UV123
San
Pablo Dam
Richmond
Ohio
Giant
20 San Pablo
23Rd
Cummings
Cedar
Rose
Cutting
Pinole Valley
Solano
Grizzly Peak
6Th
Castro
Marin
Market
Arlington
Barrett
University
Appian
3Rd
34Th
Hilltop
Gilman
37Th
Garrard
Alhambra Valley
2Nd
Garvin
Atlas
Pomona
Harbour
Marina
Parr
Carlson
Potrero
Castro Ranch
Key
Redwood
Blume
Rumrill
Mcbryde
Crockett
Willow
Valley View
Macdonald
Pablo
Parker
Hopkins
Maricopa
Ashbury
Manila
Bancroft
Colusa
S
pruce
Chesley
Fitzgerald
Sanford
1St
22Nd Rivers
Monterey
Moeser
Dwight
39Th
Buchanan
Vale
San Mateo
Manor
Tehama
13Th
Sycamore
Tara Hills
Rumrill
San Pablo
Marin
Barrett
Potrero
Richmond
20 Castro Ranch
Barrett
San Pabl o
Colusa
2Nd
Arlington
20 Appian
Hilltop
San Pablo
23Rd
Barrett
SSaann PPaabbllooBBaayy
SSaann FFrraanncciissccooBBaayy
CCaarrqquuiinneezzSSttrraaiigghhtt
SSaann RRaaffaaeellBBaayy
HHaarrbboorr CChhaannnneell RRii
cchhmmoonnddIInnnneerr HHaarrbboorr
SSaann PPaabbllooRReesseerrvvooiirr
BBrriioonneess RReesseerrvvooiirr
RRiicchhmmoonnddMMaarriinnaa BBaayy
SSaann PPaabblo Canal lo Canal
SSaannttaaFFeeCChhaannnneell
RReesseerrvvooiirr
AAnnzzaaLLaakkee
HHiillllttoopp LLaakkee
SSwwaannzzyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
MMaalloonneeyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
WWiillddccaattCCrreeeekk
JJeewweellLLaakkee
Figure 7-3
Medium Building
Two-Way DAQ Test
APPROVED:

TRM- 08 June 2012
DESIGN:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

REV
DATA SOURCE AND NOTES:

FILE NAME:
.

PROJECT NO: 60175932
CLIENT: EBRCSA
M:\Projects\Radio Projects\60091361_20175 EBRCSA\
Task E.00 RaCE Testing\CCCO West\Maps\
Figure 7-3 Medium Building Two_Way DAQ Test.mxd
FUO - 8 June 2012
KAB - 8 June 2012
GAD - 07 June 2012

DATE APPROVED BY
(434 ) 239-9200 www.aecom.com

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.
20715 TIMBERLAKE ROAD SUITE 106
LYNCHBURG, VA 24502
Legend
Medium Building Sector
Contra Costa West Test Sector
Pass (268) 0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles
Shape File data provided from ESRI
Pass: Tiles containing both a talk-in DAQ score ≥ 3
and a talk-out DAQ score ≥ 3.

Fail: Tiles with a completed test sequence and
either talk-in or talk-out DAQ scores < 3.
1862
San Francisco
Berkeley Oakland
Vallejo
Richmond
Pinole
Hercules
Albany
El Cerrito
Orinda
San Pablo
El Sobrante
Benicia
RRooddeeoo
CCrroocckkeetttt
TTiibbuurroonn
KKeennssiinnggttoonn
TTaarraa HHiillllss
BBaayyvviieeww--MMoonnttaallvviinn
EEaasstt RRiicchhmmoonndd HHeeiigghhttss
RRoolllliinnggwwoooodd
PPoorrtt CCoossttaa
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
UV123
UV4
UV24
UV123
UV4 UV4
UV123
UV123
San
Pablo Dam
Richmond
Ohio
Giant
20 San Pablo
23Rd
Cummings
Cedar
Rose
Cutting
Pinole Valley
Solano
Grizzly Peak
6Th
Castro
Marin
Market
Arlington
Barrett
University
Appian
3Rd
34Th
Hilltop
Gilman
37Th
Garrard
Alhambra Valley
2Nd
Garvin
Atlas
Pomona
Harbour
Marina
Parr
Carlson
Potrero
Castro Ranch
Key
Redwood
Blume
Rumrill
Mcbryde
Crockett
Willow
Valley View
Macdonald
Pablo
Parker
Hopkins
Maricopa
Ashbury
Manila
Bancroft
Colusa
S
pruce
Chesley
Fitzgerald
Sanford
1St
22Nd Rivers
Monterey
Moeser
Dwight
39Th
Buchanan
Vale
San Mateo
Manor
Tehama
13Th
Sycamore
Tara Hills
Rumrill
San Pablo
Marin
Barrett
Potrero
Richmond
20 Castro Ranch
Barrett
San Pabl o
Colusa
2Nd
Arlington
20 Appian
Hilltop
San Pablo
23Rd
Barrett
SSaann PPaabbllooBBaayy
SSaann FFrraanncciissccooBBaayy
CCaarrqquuiinneezzSSttrraaiigghhtt
SSaann RRaaffaaeellBBaayy
HHaarrbboorr CChhaannnneell RRii
cchhmmoonnddIInnnneerr HHaarrbboorr
SSaann PPaabbllooRReesseerrvvooiirr
BBrriioonneess RReesseerrvvooiirr
RRiicchhmmoonnddMMaarriinnaa BBaayy
SSaann PPaabblo Canal lo Canal
SSaannttaaFFeeCChhaannnneell
RReesseerrvvooiirr
AAnnzzaaLLaakkee
HHiillllttoopp LLaakkee
SSwwaannzzyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
MMaalloonneeyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
WWiillddccaattCCrreeeekk
JJeewweellLLaakkee
Figure 7-4
Portable on Street
Two-Way DAQ Test
APPROVED:

TRM - 8 June 2012
DESIGN:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

REV
DATA SOURCE AND NOTES:

FILE NAME:
.

PROJECT NO: 60175932
CLIENT: EBRCSA
Shape File data provided from ESRI
Pass: Tiles containing both a talk-in DAQ score ≥ 3
and a talk-out DAQ score ≥ 3.

Fail: Tiles with a completed test sequence and
either talk-in or talk-out DAQ scores < 3.

M:\Projects\Radio Projects\60091361_20175 EBRCSA\
Task E.00 RaCE Testing\CCCO West\Maps\
Figure 7-4 Portable on Street Two_Way DAQ Test.mxd
FUO - 8 June 2012
KAB - 8 June 2012
GAD - 8 June 2012

DATE APPROVED BY
(434 ) 239-9200 www.aecom.com

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.
20715 TIMBERLAKE ROAD SUITE 106
LYNCHBURG, VA 24502
Legend
Fail (7)
Pass (512)
Contra Costa West Test Sector 0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles
1863
San Francisco
Oakland Berkeley
Vallejo
Richmond
San Rafael
Pinole
Hercules
Albany
El Cerrito
Orinda
San Pablo
El Sobrante
RRooddeeoo
CCrroocckkeetttt
TTiibbuurroonn
KKeennssiinnggttoonn
TTaarraa HHiillllss
BBaayyvviieeww--MMoonnttaallvviinn
EEaasstt RRiicchhmmoonndd HHeeiigghhttss
RRoolllliinnggwwoooodd
PPoorrtt CCoossttaa
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
UV123
UV4
UV13
UV24
UV4
UV123
UV4
UV123
UV123
San
Pablo Dam
Richmond
Ohio
Giant
20 Grizzly Peak
San Pablo
23Rd
Dwight
Cedar
Rose
Cutting
Cummings
Pinole Valley
6Th
Solano
Castro
Marin
Market
Arlington
Barrett
University
Claremont
Appian
7Th
3Rd
34Th
Hilltop
Gilman
37Th
Garrard
2Nd
Alhambra Valley
Garvin
Atlas
Pomona
Harbour
C
ollege
Marina
Parr
Sacram
ento
Carlson
Potrero
Castro Ranch
Key
Redwood
Blume
Rumrill
Mcbryde
Crockett
Willow
Valley View
Telegraph
Macdonald
Pablo
Parker
Hopkins
Maricopa
Ashbury
Manila
Bancroft
Colusa
S
pruce
Chesley
Fitzgerald
Adeline
Sanford
1St
Skyline
22Nd Rivers
Monterey
Moeser
39Th
Buchanan
Vale
San Mateo
Manor
Tehama
13Th
Sycamore
Tara Hills
Rumrill
Richmond
Castro Ranch
Barrett
Marin
23Rd
San Pabl o
Arlington
Potrero
Barrett
Colusa
University
2Nd
20 Appian
Hilltop
San Pablo San Pablo
Barrett
SSaann PPaabbllooBBaayy
SSaann FFrraanncciissccooBBaayy
SSaann RRaaffaaeellBBaayy
CCaarrqquuiinneezzSSttrraaiigghhtt
HHaarrbboorr CChhaannnneell RRii
cchhmmoonnddIInnnneerr HHaarrbboorr
SSaann PPaabbllooRReesseerrvvooiirr
BBrriioonneess RReesseerrvvooiirr
RRiicchhmmoonnddMMaarriinnaa BBaayy
SSaann PPaabblo Canal lo Canal
SSaannttaaFFeeCChhaannnneell
RReesseerrvvooiirr
AAnnzzaaLLaakkee
HHiillllttoopp LLaakkee
LLaauurritzen Channel itzen Channel
MMaalloonneeyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
WWiillddccaattCCrreeeekk
JJeewweellLLaakkee
Figure 7-5
RaCE Talk-In
Delivered Audio
Quality (DAQ)
APPROVED:

GDM - 15 July 2011
DESIGN:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

REV
DATA SOURCE AND NOTES:

FILE NAME:
.

PROJECT NO: 60175932
CLIENT: EBRCSA
Shape File data provided from ESRI
M:\Projects\Radio Projects\60091361_20175 EBRCSA\
Task E.00 RaCE Testing\CCCO West\Maps\
Figure 7-5 RaCE_Talk-In DAQ.mxd
MJL - 15 July 2011
MJL - 15 July 2011
GDM - 15 July 2011

DATE APPROVED BY
(434 ) 239-9200 www.aecom.com

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.
20715 TIMBERLAKE ROAD SUITE 106
LYNCHBURG, VA 24502
Legend
Medium Building Sector
DAQ < 3 (5)
DAQ ≥ 3 (514)
1 June 8 2012 KAB - 8 June 2012
1864
San Francisco
B Oakland erkeley
Vallejo
Richmond
Pinole
Hercules
Albany
El Cerrito
Orinda
San Pablo
El Sobrante
Benicia
RRooddeeoo
CCrroocckkeetttt
TTiibbuurroonn
KKeennssiinnggttoonn
TTaarraa HHiillllss
BBaayyvviieeww--MMoonnttaallvviinn
EEaasstt RRiicchhmmoonndd HHeeiigghhttss
RRoolllliinnggwwoooodd
PPoorrtt CCoossttaa
EEmmeerryyvviillllee
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
UV123
UV4
UV13 UV13
UV4
UV123
UV4
UV123
UV123
San
Pablo Dam
Richmond
Ohio
Grizzly Peak
Giant
20 San Pablo
23Rd
Dwight
Cummings
Cedar
Rose
Cutting
Pinole Valley
6Th
Solano
Castro
Claremont
Marin
Market
Arlington
Barrett
University
Appian
7Th
3Rd
34Th
Hilltop
Gilman
37Th
Alcatraz
Garrard
Alhambra Valley
2Nd
C
ollege
Garvin
Atlas
Pomona
Sacramento
Harbour
Marina
Parr
Carlson
Potrero
Castro Ranch
Telegraph
Key
Redwood
Blume
Rumrill
Mcbryde
Crockett
Willow
Valley View
Macdonald
Pablo
Parker
Hopkins
Maricopa
Adeline
Ashbury
Manila
Bancroft
Colusa
S
pruce
Chesley
Skyline
Fitzgerald
Sanford
1St
22Nd
Cald ecott
Rivers
Monterey
Moeser
39Th
Buchanan
Vale
San Mateo
Manor
Broadway
Tehama
13Th
Sycamore
Chabot
Tara Hills
20 Barrett
Barrett
Rumrill
Colusa
Marin
Hilltop
Potrero
San Pabl o
Castro Ranch
Richmond
23Rd
Barrett
Arlington
Appian
20 2Nd
San Pablo San Pa blo
SSaann PPaabbllooBBaayy
SSaann FFrraanncciissccooBBaayy
SSaann RRaaffaaeellBBaayy
CCaarrqquuiinneezzSSttrraaiigghhtt
HHaarrbboorr CChhaannnneell RRii
cchhmmoonnddIInnnneerr HHaarrbboorr
SSaann PPaabbllooRReesseerrvvooiirr
BBrriioonneess RReesseerrvvooiirr
RRiicchhmmoonnddMMaarriinnaa BBaayy
SSaann PPaabblo Canal lo Canal
SSaannttaaFFeeCChhaannnneell
RReesseerrvvooiirr
AAnnzzaaLLaakkee
HHiillllttoopp LLaakkee
MMaalloonneeyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
WWiillddccaattCCrreeeekk
JJeewweellLLaakkee
Figure 7-6
RaCE Talk-Out
Delivered Audio
Quality (DAQ)
APPROVED:

GDM - 15 July 2011
DESIGN:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

REV
DATA SOURCE AND NOTES:

FILE NAME:
.

PROJECT NO: 60175932
CLIENT: EBRCSA
Shape File data provided from ESRI
M:\Projects\Radio Projects\60091361_20175 EBRCSA\
Task E.00 RaCE Testing\CCCO West\Maps\
Figure 7-6 RaCE_Talk-Out DAQ.mxd
MJL - 15 July 2011
MJL - 15 July 2011
GDM - 15 July 2011

DATE APPROVED BY
(434 ) 239-9200 www.aecom.com

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.
20715 TIMBERLAKE ROAD SUITE 106
LYNCHBURG, VA 24502
Legend
Medium Building Sector
DAQ < 3 (2)
DAQ ≥ 3 (516)
1 June 8 2012 KAB - 8 June 2012
1865
San Francisco
Oakland Berkeley
Vallejo
Richmond
Pinole
Hercules
Albany
El Cerrito
Orinda
San Pablo
El Sobrante
RRooddeeoo
CCrroocckkeetttt
TTiibbuurroonn
KKeennssiinnggttoonn
TTaarraa HHiillllss
BBaayyvviieeww--MMoonnttaallvviinn
EEaasstt RRiicchhmmoonndd HHeeiigghhttss
RRoolllliinnggwwoooodd
EEmmeerryyvviillllee
PPoorrtt CCoossttaa
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
UV123
UV4
UV13 UV13
UV4
UV123
UV4
UV123
UV123
San
Pablo Dam
Richmond
Ohio
Grizzly Peak
Giant
20 San Pablo
23Rd
Dwight
Cedar
Rose
Cutting
Cummings
Pinole Valley
6Th
Solano
Claremont
Castro
Marin
Market
Arlington
Barrett
University
Appian
Alcatraz
7Th
3Rd
34Th
Hilltop
Gilman
37Th
Garrard
Alhambra Valley
C
ollege
2Nd
Garvin
Atlas
Pomona
Sacramento
Harbour
Marina
Parr
Carlson
Potrero
Broadway
Telegraph
Castro Ranch
Key
Redwood
Blume
Rumrill
Mcbryde
Crockett
Willow
Valley View
Macdonald
Pablo
Adeline
Parker
Hopkins
Maricopa
Ashbury
Skyline
Manila
Bancroft
Colusa
S
pruce
Chesley
Fitzgerald
Sanford
1St
22Nd
Cald ecott
Rivers
Monterey
Moeser
39Th
Chabot
Buchanan
Vale
San Mateo
Manor
Tehama
13Th
Sycamore
Tara Hills
Arlington
Barrett
Rumrill
Hilltop
Marin
20 Castro Ranch
Potrero
San Pabl o
Colusa
23Rd
Barrett
Appian
Richmond
2Nd
San Pablo San Pablo
Barrett
SSaann PPaabbllooBBaayy
SSaann FFrraanncciissccooBBaayy
SSaann RRaaffaaeellBBaayy
HHaarrbboorr CChhaannnneell RRii
cchhmmoonnddIInnnneerr HHaarrbboorr
SSaann PPaabbllooRReesseerrvvooiirr
CCaarrqquuiinneezzSSttrraaiigghhtt
BBrriioonneess RReesseerrvvooiirr
RRiicchhmmoonnddMMaarriinnaa BBaayy
SSaann PPaabblo Canal lo Canal
SSaannttaaFFeeCChhaannnneell
RReesseerrvvooiirr
AAnnzzaaLLaakkee
HHiillllttoopp LLaakkee
LLaauurritzen Channel itzen Channel
MMaalloonneeyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
WWiillddccaattCCrreeeekk
JJeewweellLLaakkee
Figure 7-7
RaCE
Receive Signal
Strength Indicator (RSSI)
APPROVED:

TRM - 08 June 2012
DESIGN:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

REV
DATA SOURCE AND NOTES:

FILE NAME:
.

PROJECT NO: 60175932
CLIENT: EBRCSA
Shape File data provided from ESRI
RSSI alone does not provide an accurate
determination of voice coverage.

Values shown are for Motorola XTS and
XTL radios.

M:\Projects\Radio Projects\60091361_20175 EBRCSA\
Task E.00 RaCE Testing\CCCO West\Maps\
Figure 7-7 RaCE_RSSI.mxd
FUO - 8 June 2012
KAB - 8 June 2012
GAD - 08 June 2012

DATE APPROVED BY
(434 ) 239-9200 www.aecom.com

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.
20715 TIMBERLAKE ROAD SUITE 106
LYNCHBURG, VA 24502
Legend
Medium Building Sector
No Coverage
Mobile Only: ≥ -108.55dBm
Portable On Street: ≥ -99.18 dBm
Light Building: ≥ -93.18 dBm
Medium Building: ≥ -84.18 dBm 1866
San Francisco
Berkeley Oakland
Vallejo
Richmond
Pinole
Hercules
Albany
El Cerrito
Orinda
San Pablo
El Sobrante
Benicia
RRooddeeoo
CCrroocckkeetttt
TTiibbuurroonn
KKeennssiinnggttoonn
TTaarraa HHiillllss
BBaayyvviieeww--MMoonnttaallvviinn
EEaasstt RRiicchhmmoonndd HHeeiigghhttss
RRoolllliinnggwwoooodd
PPoorrtt CCoossttaa
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
UV123
UV4
UV24
UV123
UV4 UV4
UV123
UV123
San
Pablo Dam
Richmond
Ohio
Giant
20 San Pablo
23Rd
Cummings
Cedar
Rose
Cutting
Pinole Valley
Solano
Grizzly Peak
6Th
Castro
Marin
Market
Arlington
Barrett
University
Appian
3Rd
34Th
Hilltop
Gilman
37Th
Garrard
Alhambra Valley
2Nd
Garvin
Atlas
Pomona
Harbour
Marina
Parr
Carlson
Potrero
Castro Ranch
Key
Redwood
Blume
Rumrill
Mcbryde
Crockett
Willow
Valley View
Macdonald
Pablo
Parker
Hopkins
Maricopa
Ashbury
Manila
Bancroft
Colusa
S
pruce
Chesley
Fitzgerald
Sanford
1St
22Nd Rivers
Monterey
Moeser
Dwight
39Th
Buchanan
Vale
San Mateo
Manor
Tehama
13Th
Sycamore
Tara Hills
Rumrill
San Pablo
Marin
Barrett
Potrero
Richmond
20 Castro Ranch
Barrett
San Pabl o
Colusa
2Nd
Arlington
20 Appian
Hilltop
San Pablo
23Rd
Barrett
SSaann PPaabbllooBBaayy
SSaann FFrraanncciissccooBBaayy
CCaarrqquuiinneezzSSttrraaiigghhtt
SSaann RRaaffaaeellBBaayy
HHaarrbboorr CChhaannnneell RRii
cchhmmoonnddIInnnneerr HHaarrbboorr
SSaann PPaabbllooRReesseerrvvooiirr
BBrriioonneess RReesseerrvvooiirr
RRiicchhmmoonnddMMaarriinnaa BBaayy
SSaann PPaabblo Canal lo Canal
SSaannttaaFFeeCChhaannnneell
RReesseerrvvooiirr
AAnnzzaaLLaakkee
HHiillllttoopp LLaakkee
SSwwaannzzyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
MMaalloonneeyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
WWiillddccaattCCrreeeekk
JJeewweellLLaakkee
Figure 7-8
Motorola
Bit Error Rate
(BER) Measurement
APPROVED:

GDM - 15 July 2011
DESIGN:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

REV
DATA SOURCE AND NOTES:

FILE NAME:
.

PROJECT NO: 60175932
CLIENT: EBRCSA
Shape File data provided from ESRI
M:\Projects\Radio Projects\60091361_20175 EBRCSA\
Task E.00 RaCE Testing\CCCO West\Maps\
Figure 7-8 Motorola BER.mxd
MJL - 15 July 2011
MJL - 15 July 2011
GDM - 15 July 2011

DATE APPROVED BY
(434 ) 239-9200 www.aecom.com

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.
20715 TIMBERLAKE ROAD SUITE 106
LYNCHBURG, VA 24502
Legend
Motorola Median BER
BER <= 2% (625)
BER > 2% <= 5% (1)
BER > 5% (2)
Medium Building Sector
Contra Costa West Test Sector
1867
San Francisco
Berkeley Oakland
Vallejo
Richmond
Pinole
Hercules
Albany
El Cerrito
Orinda
San Pablo
El Sobrante
Benicia
RRooddeeoo
CCrroocckkeetttt
TTiibbuurroonn
KKeennssiinnggttoonn
TTaarraa HHiillllss
BBaayyvviieeww--MMoonnttaallvviinn
EEaasstt RRiicchhmmoonndd HHeeiigghhttss
RRoolllliinnggwwoooodd
PPoorrtt CCoossttaa
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
§¨¦80
§¨¦580
UV123
UV4
UV24
UV123
UV4 UV4
UV123
UV123
San
Pablo Dam
Richmond
Ohio
Giant
20 San Pablo
23Rd
Cummings
Cedar
Rose
Cutting
Pinole Valley
Solano
Grizzly Peak
6Th
Castro
Marin
Market
Arlington
Barrett
University
Appian
3Rd
34Th
Hilltop
Gilman
37Th
Garrard
Alhambra Valley
2Nd
Garvin
Atlas
Pomona
Harbour
Marina
Parr
Carlson
Potrero
Castro Ranch
Key
Redwood
Blume
Rumrill
Mcbryde
Crockett
Willow
Valley View
Macdonald
Pablo
Parker
Hopkins
Maricopa
Ashbury
Manila
Bancroft
Colusa
S
pruce
Chesley
Fitzgerald
Sanford
1St
22Nd Rivers
Monterey
Moeser
Dwight
39Th
Buchanan
Vale
San Mateo
Manor
Tehama
13Th
Sycamore
Tara Hills
Rumrill
San Pablo
Marin
Barrett
Potrero
Richmond
20 Castro Ranch
Barrett
San Pabl o
Colusa
2Nd
Arlington
20 Appian
Hilltop
San Pablo
23Rd
Barrett
SSaann PPaabbllooBBaayy
SSaann FFrraanncciissccooBBaayy
CCaarrqquuiinneezzSSttrraaiigghhtt
SSaann RRaaffaaeellBBaayy
HHaarrbboorr CChhaannnneell RRii
cchhmmoonnddIInnnneerr HHaarrbboorr
SSaann PPaabbllooRReesseerrvvooiirr
BBrriioonneess RReesseerrvvooiirr
RRiicchhmmoonnddMMaarriinnaa BBaayy
SSaann PPaabblo Canal lo Canal
SSaannttaaFFeeCChhaannnneell
RReesseerrvvooiirr
AAnnzzaaLLaakkee
HHiillllttoopp LLaakkee
SSwwaannzzyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
MMaalloonneeyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
WWiillddccaattCCrreeeekk
JJeewweellLLaakkee
Figure 7-9
RaCE Channel
Grant Failure
APPROVED:

GDM - 15 July 2011
DESIGN:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

REV
DATA SOURCE AND NOTES:

FILE NAME:
.

PROJECT NO: 60175932
CLIENT: EBRCSA
Shape File data provided from ESRI
M:\Projects\Radio Projects\60091361_20175 EBRCSA\
Task E.00 RaCE Testing\CCCO West\Maps\
Figure 7-9 RaCE_Channel Grant Failure.mxd
MJL - 15 July 2011
MJL - 15 July 2011
GDM - 15 July 2011

DATE APPROVED BY
(434 ) 239-9200 www.aecom.com

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.
20715 TIMBERLAKE ROAD SUITE 106
LYNCHBURG, VA 24502
Legend
Channel Grant Failure (3)
Medium Building Sector
Contra Costa West Test Sector
1868
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
31 8 Conclusions
AECOM performed two-way DAQ testing in every accessible tile. We listened to all test files with a DAQ score of 3 or lower, and a sampling of the remaining messages. The test results show that the Contra Costa County West simulcast cell meets the coverage requirement of the specifications.

Based on the results AECOM observed, the radio coverage in the Contra Costa County West simulcast cell meets the EBRCSA specifications. Therefore, we recommend that the EBRCS Authority approves the coverage acceptance test of the Contra Costa County West simulcast cell.
1869
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
32 Appendix A RaCESM & Test Vehicle Procedures
A.1 Pre-Test Procedures
On arrival at the central testing location, the following procedures will be executed:
 Verify installation of approved version of the RaCESM software on all laptops.  Set and verify audio levels for each installed radio.  Mobile Unit – Ensure that the mobile unit remains in the correct configuration as indicated in Figure 3-1.  Stationary Unit – Reproduce the stationary configuration established above in Figure 3-2.  Verify the Mobile Unit has the correct Contra Costa County trunked system frequencies input into RaCESM .
 Install mobile RaCESM system into vehicle and verify system operation using the assigned AECOM talk group.  Extract data from RaCESM mobile and stationary units and verify that the data is acceptable in post processing.  Send RaCESM test results and project files to AECOM project engineer for validation.

A.2 Daily Test Procedures
Before commencing testing each day, the following procedures will be executed:
 Visually inspect the RaCESM stationary and mobile unit, ensure all cables are properly connected and verify correct attenuation on the mobile circulator network for the area under test.  Proceed to collect data until each accessible tile has been tested.

A.3 Conclusion of each Day of Testing
At the conclusion of testing each shift, the following procedures will be executed:
 Extract data from the RaCESM mobile and stationary computers and place on the external hard drive.  Note the days’ progress and any other pertinent information necessary and send to AECOM project engineer for review.  Run the RaCESM post-processing software
 Verify that the extracted RaCESM data is properly correlated and merged. If not, contact the AECOM project engineer for troubleshooting.
 Preserve the extracted RaCESM data on the external storage device.

A.4 Conclusion of Testing
At the conclusion of testing the following procedures will be executed:
 Ensure all test data are extracted and preserved.
 Return all AECOM equipment back to Sacramento.
 Return all Motorola and EBRCSA supplied equipment to its owner in Contra Costa County.

1870
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
33 Appendix B EBRCSA Supplied Equipment
The following list contains the EBRCSA supplied equipment necessary for the Contra Costa County West testing.

Figure B-1 EBRCSA Supplied Equipment and Quality
Equipment Quantity
Mobile Radio
APX-7500
(control heads mounted on the radio)
Vehicle install Kit
(includes accessory and power cables and mounting
trunion)
Hand Held Microphone 3
Magnetic Mount Antennas
(BNC connectors)
3 3
7 1871
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
34 Portable Antenna Location Overall Gain
Hip -8.50 dBd
Antenna Radiative Gain (Assumed) 2.15 dBi 0.00 dBd
Antenna Resistive Loss (Assumed) -10.65 dBi -8.50 dBd
Portable Receiver

0.25 µV -119.03 dBm
Static C/N Ratio (from TSB-88.1-C) 6.50 dB
Noise Floor -125.53 dBm
Faded C/N Ratio (from TSB-88.1-C) 15.70 dB
Sensitivity -109.83 dBm
Noise
Effective Noise Bandwidth (from TSB-88-B) 5.50 kHz
Thermal Noise (kTB) -136.57 dBm
Environmental Noise (above kTB) 0.00 dB
Total Noise -136.57 dBm
Noise Figure
Receiver Noise Floor -125.53 dBm
Thermal Noise Floor -136.57 dBm
Receiver Noise Figure 11.04 dBm
System
Total Noise Input -136.57 dBm
Gain Noise Figure
Antenna Resistive Loss -10.65 dB 10.65 dB
Receiver 0.00 dB 11.04 dB
Composite System Gain and Noise Figure -10.65 dB 21.69 dB -125.53 dBm
Faded C/N Ratio 15.70 dB
Sensitivity at Receiver -109.83 dBm
Composite System Gains -10.65 dB
-99.18 dBm
Antenna Radiative Gain 0.00 dBd
System Sensitivity -99.18 dBm
Receiver System Sensitivity -99.18 dBm
Portable Location Attenuation Signal Strength
Outdoor 0.00 dB -99.18 dBm
Light Building 6.00 dB -93.18 dBm
Medium Building 15.00 dB -84.18 dBm
ArcView Display Parameters
Portable Receiver System
Static Sensitivity (from Manufacturer Specification Sheet) Noise at Receiver {No = [Ni + (F - 1) * kTB] * g}
Receiver System Sensitivity (Accounting for Antenna Resistive Appendix C Received Signal Strength Threshold Calculations The following tables show the calculations used to determine the thresholds for various levels of coverage based on RSSI.

Table C-1 Portable Radio RSSI Threshold Level Calculations

1872
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
35 Mobile Antenna Make & Model Gain
-1.00 dBd
Cables Diameter/Type Unit Loss Length Loss
Coax from Antenna to Receiver Low-Loss RG-58 8.51 dB/100 ft 15 ft 1.28 dB Receiver

0.25 µV -119.03 dBm
Static C/N Ratio (from TSB-88.1-C) 6.50 dB
Noise Floor -125.53 dBm
Faded C/N Ratio (from TSB-88.1-C) 15.70 dB
Sensitivity -109.83 dBm
Noise
Effective Noise Bandwidth 5.50 kHz
Thermal Noise (kTB) -136.57 dBm
Environmental Noise (above kTB) 0.00 dB
Total Noise -136.57 dBm
Noise Figure
Receiver Noise Floor -125.53 dBm
Thermal Noise Floor -136.57 dBm
Receiver Noise Figure 11.04 dBm
System
Total Noise Input -136.57 dBm
Gain Noise Figure
Cable -1.28 dB 1.28 dB
Receiver 0.00 dB 11.04 dB
Composite System Gain and Noise Figure -1.28 dB 12.32 dB -125.53 dBm
Faded C/N Ratio 15.70 dB
Sensitivity at Receiver -109.83 dBm
Composite System Gains -1.28 dB
Receiver System Sensitivity -108.55 dB
Antenna Gain -1.00 dBd
System Sensitivity -107.55 dBm
Location Signal Strength
Mobile -108.55 dBm
Static Sensitivity (from manufacturer specification sheet) Noise at Receiver {No = [Ni + (F - 1) * kTB] * g}
Mobile Receiver System
Table C-2 Mobile Radio RSSI Threshold Level Calculation 1873
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
36 Appendix D Checklists
The following Figures are checklists and forms that were used during the Contra Costa County RaCESM Automated Coverage Testing.

1874
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
37 Figure D-1 Master Checklist

Client Name
Project Number
RaCE Unit Serial Numbers
Manufacturer & Model
Serial Number
Radios
Manufacturer & Model
Serial Number
RaCE Unit Serial Numbers
Manufacturer & Model
Serial Numbers
Manufacturer & Model
Serial Numbers
Step 1: Determine Radio/System Requirements

1.1 Programming of Radios complete JMK

1.2 System configuration complete JMK

1.3 Hardware requirement complete JMK
JMK
Step 2: Determine or Develop Radio Interface JMK
JMK
GDM
GDM
Step 5: Bench Setup / Setting Audio Levels
JMK
GDM
GDM
GDM
GDM
GDM
GDM
GDM
Name
Signature Date: 8/2/2011
Step 10: Return Customer Equipment 6/24/2011
Step 11: Restock Equipment, Archive & Clear data from Laptops 6/27/2011 Step 8: Daily Checklists 6/17-6/22/2011
Step 9: Final Report 8/2/2011
Step 6: Inventory Sheet 6/13/2011
Step 7: Arrival Setup Checklist 6/16/2011

5.1 Bench Setup 5/14/2011

5.2 Set Audio Levels 6/16/2011
Step 4: RaCE Software Settings

4.1 Stationary Project File 6/16/2011

4.2 Mobile Project File 6/16/2011

1.4 Sites/Frequencies complete 5/13/2011
5/18/2011
Step 3: Configure Circulator 5/18/2011
656CLZ6496
Date Complete / Initial
5/13/2011
5/13/2011
5/13/2011
M06
Computers
LENOVO T-61
L3 C2113
Radios
Motorola APX 7500
LENOVO T-61
L3 C2104
Motorola APX 7500
656CLZ6480
RaCE Mobile Units
EBRCSA-Contra Costa West
60091361
RaCE Stationary Units
S06
Computers
1875
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
38 Figure D-2 Inventory Checklist

Client Name
Project Number
RaCE Stationary Unit Pirmary Secondary
AC Power Cord
DC Power Cord
RF Power Sensor Cable (RCA)
Radio Control Interface Cable
USB Cables for laptop
Power Cord for Customer Radio
DC Power Supply Adapter
Radio Model XTL5000/Spare
RF Cable from customer radio
Sniffer
RF Attenuator (optional)
Antenna
Adapters to interconnect above items
Laptop
Laptop Power Supply
GPS Receiver
USB extension cord for GPS
RaCE Mobile Unit Primary Secondary
Radio Model XTS2500/Spare
AC Power Cord
DC Power Cord
RF Power Sensor Cable (RCA)
Radio Control Interface Cable
USB Cables for laptop
Power Cord for Customer Radio
DC Power Supply Adapter
Networking Cable
RF Cable from customer radio
Sniffer
Antennas for Radio, RSSI, BER
Optoelectronics Digital Scout (optional if measuring TX Freq.) Scout Data Cable
Scout DC Power Cable
RF Sampler
RF Cable to Sampler
Circulator Network (optional)
Adapters to interconnect above items
Laptop
Laptop Power Supply (DC Adapter)
GPS/DR Receiver
USB extension cord for GPS
BER Radio
60091361
EBRCSA-Contra Costa West
1876
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
39 Figure D-3 Arrival Checklist

Client Name
Project Number
Stationary Unit Setup
RaCE Unit Serial Number
Antenna Mounting Location
Name
Address
City, State
Latitude
Longitude
RaCE Unit Serial Number
Vehicle Year, Make & Model
Antenna Mounting on Vehicle
(-55)-(-60) Measured with Ramsey Comm Analyzer at window.

Name: Gary Mountcastle
60091361

2. Confirm the results of the mobile and stationary units in RaCE Explorer.

Verify .wav file amplitude and timing is correct.

37.97752
-122.32323

3. Assure secondary Jurisdiction radio that is not part of the test, if present, cannot transmit OR receive
3150 Garrity Way
S06
Window ledge of hotel room.

Courtyard Marriott
Signature
Pre-Test Checklist

4. Establish location and take reference measurement(s) of local Control Channel(s)
Ford Crown Vic
Mobile-Center front of roof,Icom1-Back left of
roof,Icom2-Back right of roof.

EBRCSA-Contra Costa West

1. Initiate the RaCE self-diagnostic tests to insure that the system is operating correctly.

Notes:

Mobile Unit Setup
Notes: Room 512
Test Set Location
M06
Richmond, CA 94806
1877
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
40 Figure D-4 Daily Checklist

1 2
3 4
5 6
1 2
3 Notes:

Name
Signature Date: 6/17/2011-6/22/2011
End of Shift Checklist
Provide Email to AECOM project engineer indicating number of grids tested, location of testing and any issues encountered.

Assure Jurisdiction radio that is not part of the test, if present, cannot transmit OR receive Driver(s) Deputy Audrey Catweza
Verify the attenuation is correctly set.

Verify Mobile and Stationary Audio levels and timing are correct.

Verify Control Channel(s) are on expected frequency and at the approximate dBm level.

Forms completed for 6/17/11-6/22/11
Gary Mountcastle
Process the raw data through RaCE Explorer. Review the test results with an emphasis on checking:

1. Stationary and Mobile correlation.

2. Stationary and Mobile wave form timing and amplitude.

Extract data from the mobile and stationary computers and transfer to external hard drive NA
Daily Pre-Test Checklist
Gary Mountcastle
Ford Crown Vic
Client Name
60091361
EBRCSA-Contra Costa West
Test System Operator(s)
Vehicle License Plate #
Vehicle Make & Model
Date
Project Number
All days were sunny and clear. Cool in morning and
evening and warmer during the day.

Manufacturer Representative
Weather Conditions
Configure Mobile Systems for daily operation.

Configure Stationary Systems for daily operation.
1878
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
41 Figure D-5 Mobile Unit Software Settings Checklist

RaCE Release Number
Client Name
Project Number
Primary Test Unit Secondary Test Unit
Test Type Continuous, by Time Continuous, by Time
Continuous, by Grid Continuous, by Grid
Test Mode TX + RX TX + RX
RX RX + Access
RX + Access RX + Access
Access Access

RSII RSSI
TX + RX TX
Radio System Type Trunked Trunked
Conventional Conventional
Radio System Mode Analog Analog
Digital IMBE Digital IMBE
VOX Activation Yes Yes
No No
Collect pre/post - VOX audio? Yes Yes
No No
Minimum Speed to Start Sequence
System Manufacturer
Verify IQS to DAQ Conversion Tables
Verify Primary RSSI Conversion Tables
Verify Secondary RSSI Conversion Tables
Maximum Transmit Duty Cycle % %
Map File
TX/Reference Message Files
RaCE Mobile Project File Name

3.05 EBRCSA-Contra Costa West
60091361
CCC_West_Mobile_Medium Building.5op
CCC_West_Mobile_Portable on Street.5op
1879
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
42 Figure D-6 Software Settings Stationary Checklist
RaCE Release Number
Client Name
Project Number
Test Type Continuous, by Time Continuous, by Time
Continuous, by Grid Continuous, by Grid
Test Mode TX + RX TX + RX
RX RX + Access
RX + Access RX + Access
Access Access

RSII RSSI
TX + RX TX
Radio System Type Trunked Trunked
Conventional Conventional
Radio System Mode Analog Analog
Digital IMBE Digital IMBE
VOX Activation Yes Yes
No No
Collect pre/post - VOX audio? Yes Yes
No No
System Manufacturer
Verify IQS to DAQ Conversion Tables
Maximum Transmit Duty Cycle %%
TX/Reference Message Files
RaCE Stationary Project File Name CCC_West_Stationary.5op EBRCSA-Contra Costa West
60091361

3.05 1880
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
43 Figure D-7 Audio Levels

Client Name
Project Number
Stationary Unit
TX - Audio Setting (Deviation) NA - Digital Modulation
RaCE Interface Switch 2 (0-10)
RaCE Interface Potentiometer 0:00 (Clock Position)
Computer Volume Lock - Speaker 50 (0-100)
Computer Volume Lock - Wave 50 (0-100)
RX - Audio Settings
Customer Radio Volume Setting Upper left corner of control head RaCE Interface Switch 2 (0-10)
RaCE Interface Potentiometer 10:00 ( Clock Position )
Computer Volume Lock - Line In 50 (0-100)
Mobile Unit
TX - Audio Setting (Deviation) NA - Digital Modulation
RaCE Interface Switch 2 (0-10)
RaCE Interface Potentiometer 14:00 (Clock Position)
Computer Volume Lock - Speaker 50 (0-100)
Computer Volume Lock - Wave 50 (0-100)
RX - Audio Settings
Customer Radio Volume Setting Upper left corner of control head RaCE Interface Switch 2 (0-10)
RaCE Interface Potentiometer 1:00 ( Clock Position )
Computer Volume Lock - Line In 50 (0-100)
60091361
EBRCSA-Contra Costa West
1881
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
44 Figure D-8 Radio Interface
Radio Control Pinout
DB9-Pin Motorola
1 TX Audio - Hi <---------> 3
2 TX Audio - Lo <---------> 4
3 Gnd <---------> 10
4 PTT <---------> 8
5 RX Audio - Hi <---------> Speaker-Hi
6 RX Audio - Lo <---------> Speaker-Lo
Notes:

Pinout numbers in Motorola connector diagram are for reference only.

Cable connects to control head of Motorola APX 7500
Project Number
Client Name
60091361
EBRCSA-Contra Costa West
Molex
Connector
1 10
4 9
5 8
7 6
2 3
1882
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
45 Appendix E Standard Harvard Phrases
Harvard Sentences
From the appendix of: IEEE Subcommittee on Subjective Measurements IEEE Recommended Practices for Speech Quality Measurements. IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics. Vol 17, 227-46, 1969. Also found at CMU site.

Two hundred messages from the Harvard Sentences were used during the coverage testing. The selected phrases used in the messages are shown below. Test messages of five to eight seconds were used for coverage testing, with randomly sorted messages that were half and half male and female voices.

Phrases used for male audio recordings:

List 2

1. The boy was there when the sun rose.

2. A rod is used to catch pink salmon.

3. The source of the huge river is the clear spring.

4. Kick the ball straight and follow through.

5. Help the woman get back to her feet.

6. A pot of tea helps to pass the evening.

7. Smoky fires lack flame and heat.

8. The soft cushion broke the man’s fall.

9. The salt breeze came across from the sea.

10. The girl at the booth sold fifty bonds.

List 4

1. Hoist the load to your left shoulder.

2. Take the winding path to reach the lake.

3. Note closely the size of the gas tank.

4. Wipe the grease off his dirty face.

5. Mend the coat before you go out.

6. The wrist was badly strained and hung limp.

7. The stray cat gave birth to kittens.

8. The young girl gave no clear response.

9. The meal was cooked before the bell rang.

10. What joy there is in living.

List 7

1. We talked of the slide show in the circus.

2. Use a pencil to write the first draft.

3. He ran half way to the hardware store.

4. The clock struck to mark the third period.

5. A small creek cut across the field.

6. Cars and busses stalled in snow drifts.

7. The set of china hit, the floor with a crash.

8. This is a grand season for hikes on the road.

9. The dune rose from the edge of the water.

10. Those words were the cue for the actor to leave
List 8

1. A yacht slid around the point into the bay.

2. The two met while playing on the sand.

3. The ink stain dried on the finished page.

4. The walled town was seized without a fight.

5. The lease ran out in sixteen weeks.

6. A tame squirrel makes a nice pet.

7. The horn of the car woke the sleeping cop.

8. The heart beat strongly and with firm strokes.

9. The pearl was worn in a thin silver ring.

10. The fruit peel was cut in thick slices.

List 9

1. The Navy attacked the big task force.

2. See the cat glaring at the scared mouse.

3. There are more than two factors here.

4. The hat brim was wide and too droopy.

5. The lawyer tried to lose his case.

6. The grass curled around the fence post.

7. Cut the pie into large parts.

8. Men strive but seldom get rich.

9. Always close the barn door tight.

10. He lay prone and hardly moved a limb.

List 10

1. The slush lay deep along the street.

2. A wisp of cloud hung in the blue air.

3. A pound of sugar costs more than eggs.

4. The fin was sharp and cut the clear water.

5. The play seems dull and quite stupid.

6. Bail the boat, to stop it from sinking.

7. The term ended in late June that year.

8. A tusk is used to make costly gifts.

9. Ten pins were set in order.

10. The bill was paid every third week.

List 13

1. Type out three lists of orders.

2. The harder he tried the less he got done.

3. The boss ran the show with a watchful eye.

4. The cup cracked and spilled its contents.

5. Paste can cleanse the most dirty brass.

6. The slang word for raw whiskey is booze.

7. It caught its hind paw in a rusty trap.

8. The wharf could be seen at the farther shore.

9. Feel the heat of the weak dying flame.

10. The tiny girl took off her hat.
1883
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
46 List 16

1. The empty flask stood on the tin tray.

2. A speedy man can beat this track mark.

3. He broke a new shoelace that day.

4. The coffee stand is too high for the couch.

5. The urge to write short stories is rare.

6. The pencils have all been used.

7. The pirates seized the crew of the lost ship.

8. We tried to replace the coin but failed.

9. She sewed the torn coat quite neatly.

10. The sofa cushion is red and of light weight.

List 18

1. Steam hissed from the broken valve.

2. The child almost hurt the small dog.

3. There was a sound of dry leaves outside.

4. The sky that morning was clear and bright blue.

5. Torn scraps littered the stone floor.

6. Sunday is the best part of the week.

7. The doctor cured him with these pills.

8. The new girl was fired today at noon.

9. They felt gay when the ship arrived in port.

10. Add the store’s account to the last cent.

List 19

1. Acid burns holes in wool cloth.

2. Fairy tales should be fun to write.

3. Eight miles of woodland burned to waste.

4. The third act was dull and tired the players.

5. A young child should not suffer fright.

6. Add the column and put the sum here.

7. We admire and love a good cook.

8. There the flood mark is ten inches.

9. He carved a head from the round block of
marble.

10. She has a smart way of wearing clothes.

1884
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
47 Phrases used for female audio recordings:

List 24

1. Try to have the court decide the case.

2. They are pushed back each time they attack.

3. He broke his ties with groups of former friends.

4. They floated on the raft to sun their white backs.

5. The map had an X that meant nothing.

6. Whitings are small fish caught in nets.

7. Some ads serve to cheat buyers.

8. Jerk the rope and the bell rings weakly.

9. A waxed floor makes us lose balance.

10. Madam, this is the best brand of corn.

List 28

1. The horse trotted around the field at a brisk pace.

2. Find the twin who stole the pearl necklace.

3. Cut the cord that binds the box tightly.

4. The red tape bound the smuggled food.

5. Look in the corner to find the tan shirt.

6. The cold drizzle will halt the bond drive.

7. Nine men were hired to dig the ruins.

8. The junk yard had a mouldy smell.

9. The flint sputtered and lit a pine torch.

10. Soak the cloth and drown the sharp odor.

List 34

1. Nine rows of soldiers stood in line.

2. The beach is dry and shallow at low tide.

3. The idea is to sew both edges straight.

4. The kitten chased the dog down the street.

5. Pages bound in cloth make a book.

6. Try to trace the fine lines of the painting.

7. Women form less than half of the group.

8. The zones merge in the central part of town.

9. A gem in the rough needs work to polish.

10. Code is used when secrets are sent.

List 38

1. It takes a lot of help to finish these.

2. Mark the spot with a sign painted red.

3. Take two shares as a fair profit.

4. The fur of cats goes by many names.

5. North winds bring colds and fevers.

6. He asks no person to vouch for him.

7. Go now and come here later.

8. A sash of gold silk will trim her dress.

9. Soap can wash most dirt away.

10. That move means the game is over.

List 39

1. He wrote down a long list of items.

2. A siege will crack the strong defense.

3. Grape juice and water mix well.

4. Roads are paved with sticky tar.

5. Fake &ones shine but cost little.

6. The drip of the rain made a pleasant sound.

7. Smoke poured out of every crack.

8. Serve the hot rum to the tired heroes.

9. Much of the story makes good sense.

10. The sun came up to light the eastern sky.

List 46

1. A clean neck means a neat collar.

2. The couch cover and hall drapes were blue.

3. The stems of the tall glasses cracked and broke.

4. The wall phone rang loud and often.

5. The clothes dried on a thin wooden rack.

6. Turn on the lantern which gives us light.

7. The cleat sank deeply into the soft turf.

8. The bills were mailed promptly on the tenth of the
month.

9. To have is better than to wait and hope.

10. The price is fair for a good antique clock.

List 47

1. The music played on while they talked.

2. Dispense with a vest on a day like this.

3. The bunch of grapes was pressed into wine.

4. He sent the figs, but kept the ripe cherries.

5. The hinge on the door creaked with old age.

6. The screen before the fire kept in the sparks.

7. Fly by night and you waste little time.

8. Thick glasses helped him read the print.

9. Birth and death mark the limits of life.

10. The chair looked strong but had no bottom.

List 50

1. A man in a blue sweater sat at the desk.

2. Oats are a food eaten by horse and man.

3. Their eyelids droop for want of sleep.

4. The sip of tea revives his tired friend.

5. There are many ways to do these things.

6. Tuck the sheet under the edge of the mat.

7. A force equal to that would move the earth.

8. We like to see clear weather.

9. The work of the tailor is seen on each side.

10. Take a chance and win a china doll.

List 53

1. Press the pedal with your left foot.

2. Neat plans fail without luck.

3. The black trunk fell from the landing.

4. The bank pressed for payment of the debt.

5. The theft of the pearl pin was kept secret.

6. Shake hands with this friendly child.

7. The vast space stretched into the far distance.

8. A rich farm is rare in this sandy waste.

9. His wide grin earned many friends.

10. Flax makes a fine brand of paper.
1885
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
48 List 56

1. The small red neon lamp went out.

2. Clams are small, round, soft, and tasty.

3. The fan whirled its round blades softly.

4. The line where the edges join was clean.

5. Breathe deep and smell the piney air.

6. It matters not if he reads these words or those.

7. A brown leather bag hung from its strap.

8. A toad and a frog are hard to tell apart.

9. A white silk jacket goes with any shoes.

10. A break in the dam almost caused a flood.
1886
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for
Contra Costa County West Simulcast Cell
52 Appendix F Detailed Results
The detailed results are presented in table format. The table contains the following columns:
 Grid: a X,Y string describing which tile this row’s data is from. See figure F-1 for a map that shows each tile’s X,Y string.
 Test Sector: states whether the tile was in test sector 1a or 1b.  Area: states if the tile was part of Motorola’s Covered Area (“Covered Area”). If the tile was not part of it, it’s listed as “Service Area.”
 Talk-In DAQ: the score of the Talk-In DAQ test.
 Talk-Out DAQ: the score of the Talk-Out DAQ test.
 Median BER (%): the median Bit Error Rate (BER) collected by Motorola in the tile.  RSSI: The Received Signal Strength Indication (RSSI) in dBm as measured by AECOM in that tile. The RSSI measurements were conducted on the control channel during the talk-out. 1887
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-1 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
44,46 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -87.5
45,46 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -89
46,46 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -93
41,47 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -77.5
42,47 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -82.5
43,47 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -83.5
44,47 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -86.5
45,47 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -81.5
40,48 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -77.5
41,48 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -96.5
42,48 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -99
44,48 1a Service Area 4.5 5 -96.5
45,48 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -91
40,49 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -96
41,49 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -97.5
42,49 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -103
43,49 1a Service Area 4 4 -96.5
44,49 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -101
24,50 1a Service Area 4 5 -79
39,50 1a Service Area 4 4 -101.5
40,50 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -99.5
41,50 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -93.5
42,50 1a Covered Area 3 4 0 -102.5
23,51 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -62
24,51 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -60
25,51 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -69.5
27,51 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -81.5
28,51 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -78
29,51 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -69
30,51 1b Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -77.5
31,51 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -77.5
32,51 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -82.5
33,51 1b Service Area 4 4 -70
38,51 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -97.5
39,51 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -96
40,51 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -91
41,51 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -96
43,51 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -89.5
26,52 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.2 -84
27,52 1b Service Area 4 4 -85.5
28,52 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -73
29,52 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -79.5
30,52 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -75
31,52 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -72
1888
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-2 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
32,52 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -77
33,52 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -71
34,52 1b Service Area 4 4 -78
35,52 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -72
36,52 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -81.5
37,52 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -73
38,52 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -93.5
39,52 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -93.5
40,52 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -84
41,52 1a Service Area 3.4 3.4 -83
42,52 1a Service Area 4 5 -82
11,53 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -78
12,53 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -75
19,53 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -66
25,53 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.2 -71
26,53 1b Covered Area 4 5 0.39 -78
27,53 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.2 -77
28,53 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -70.5
29,53 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -82
30,53 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -76.5
31,53 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -78
32,53 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -80
33,53 1b Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -78
34,53 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -77.5
35,53 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -74.5
36,53 1a Covered Area 4.5 3.4 0 -87
37,53 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -106
38,53 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -102.5
42,53 1a Service Area 4.5 3.4 -84
9,54 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -70
10,54 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -48
11,54 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -73.5
12,54 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -67.5
13,54 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -61.5
14,54 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -69.5
16,54 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -56
17,54 1a Covered Area 3.4 5 0 -57.5
19,54 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -75.5
20,54 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -69.5
24,54 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -75
25,54 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -76.5
26,54 1b Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -69.5
27,54 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -60
28,54 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -72
1889
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-3 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
29,54 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -65.5
30,54 1b Covered Area 3.4 4.5 0.39 -75.5
31,54 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -68.5
32,54 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -77
33,54 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -85.5
34,54 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -82
35,54 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -83
36,54 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -88
10,55 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -46
13,55 1a Covered Area 4.5 3.4 0 -61
14,55 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -60.5
16,55 1a Covered Area 3.4 4.5 0 -66
17,55 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -69
18,55 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -70.5
19,55 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -67
20,55 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -62
22,55 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -58
23,55 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.39 -67
24,55 1b Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -54.5
25,55 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -46.5
26,55 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -50.5
27,55 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -48.5
28,55 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -64
29,55 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -69
30,55 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -69.5
31,55 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -68.5
32,55 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -82
33,55 1b Covered Area 4 5 0 -85
10,56 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -66
12,56 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -52.5
13,56 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -58
15,56 1a Service Area 4 4 -60.5
16,56 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -67.5
17,56 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -55.5
18,56 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -53
19,56 1a Covered Area 5 4 0 -70.5
20,56 1a Covered Area 5 4 0 -68
21,56 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -67
22,56 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -67.5
23,56 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.39 -57.5
24,56 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -61.5
25,56 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -51
26,56 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -55
27,56 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -44.5
1890
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-4 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
28,56 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -60
29,56 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -58.5
30,56 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -81.5
31,56 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -77
32,56 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -72
33,56 1b Service Area 4 4 -75.5
9,57 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -68.5
10,57 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -48.5
11,57 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -61.5
14,57 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -52.5
15,57 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -52
16,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -59.5
17,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -49.5
18,57 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -59.5
19,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -60
20,57 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.2 -68
21,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -65.5
22,57 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -59.5
23,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -64
24,57 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -59.5
25,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -55.5
26,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -45.5
27,57 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -53
28,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -51
29,57 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -68
30,57 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -83
31,57 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -80.5
32,57 1b Service Area 4.5 4.5 -81.5
8,58 1a Service Area 4 4 -80.5
9,58 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0.39 -63.5
10,58 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -55
11,58 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -64
12,58 1b Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -44.5
13,58 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -47.5
14,58 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -49
15,58 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -52.5
16,58 1b Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -54.5
17,58 1b Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -65.5
18,58 1b Covered Area 5 5 0 -62.5
19,58 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -62.5
20,58 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -61
21,58 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -62
22,58 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -61
23,58 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -60
1891
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-5 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
24,58 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -48
25,58 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -52
26,58 1b Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -44.5
27,58 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -58
28,58 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -44.5
29,58 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -75.5
30,58 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -74
31,58 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -82
6,59 1a Service Area 4 4 -86.5
7,59 1a Service Area 4 4 -76
8,59 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0.2 -71.5
9,59 1b Covered Area 3.4 4.5 0 -61.5
10,59 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -47
11,59 1b Service Area 5 4 -48.5
12,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -55
13,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -49
14,59 1b Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -53.5
15,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -62
16,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -59
17,59 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -61.5
18,59 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -54.5
19,59 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -65.5
20,59 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -65.5
21,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -66.5
22,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -58.5
23,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.39 -57
24,59 1b Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -55
25,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -61.5
26,59 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -49.5
27,59 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -72.5
28,59 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -75
29,59 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -75
30,59 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -76
31,59 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -88
4,60 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -83
5,60 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -63
6,60 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -76
11,60 1b Covered Area 5 4 0 -45.5
12,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -51.5
13,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -60
14,60 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.2 -66
15,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -64
16,60 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -65.5
17,60 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -69.5
1892
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-6 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
18,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -65
19,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -57.5
20,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -62
21,60 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -62.5
22,60 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -60
23,60 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -61
24,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -68.5
25,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -66
26,60 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -69
27,60 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -62.5
28,60 1b Service Area 4.5 4 -57
29,60 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -75.5
30,60 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -74.5
4,61 1a Service Area 4.5 3.4 -86
11,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.39 -53
12,61 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0.2 -56
13,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -62.5
14,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0.2 -64
15,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -63
16,61 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -63.5
17,61 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -63.5
18,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -60
19,61 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -64.5
20,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -65
21,61 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -65.5
22,61 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -58.5
23,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -51.5
24,61 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -65.5
25,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -65.5
26,61 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -68
27,61 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.1 -68
28,61 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -67.5
29,61 1a Service Area 4.5 3.4 -73.5
38,61 1a Service Area 4 4 -100.5
4,62 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -94
12,62 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -53
13,62 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -58
14,62 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -63
15,62 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -67
16,62 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -59
17,62 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -63
18,62 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -65.5
19,62 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -61.5
20,62 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -63.5
1893
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-7 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
21,62 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -56.5
22,62 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -60
23,62 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -57
24,62 1b Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -62
25,62 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -51.5
26,62 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -62.5
27,62 1a Covered Area 3.4 4.5 0 -62.5
37,62 1a Service Area 3.4 4.5 -97
38,62 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -99
3,63 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -84.5
4,63 1a Service Area 4 4 -89
12,63 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -57
13,63 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -55.5
14,63 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.39 -63
15,63 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -58.5
16,63 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -62
17,63 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -64.5
18,63 1b Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -64.5
19,63 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -61
20,63 1b Covered Area 5 5 0 -59.5
21,63 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -57
22,63 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -59
23,63 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -62
24,63 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -60
25,63 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -67.5
26,63 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -56
36,63 1a Service Area 3 4.5 -101.5
37,63 1a Service Area 4 4 -102
3,64 1a Service Area 3.4 3.4 -99.5
13,64 1b Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0.2 -54.5
14,64 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.1 -69.5
15,64 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -61.5
16,64 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -66.5
17,64 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -59
18,64 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -60.5
19,64 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -59.5
20,64 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -56
21,64 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -58.5
22,64 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -49.5
23,64 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -50.5
24,64 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -66.5
25,64 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -65
26,64 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -48
36,64 1a Service Area 4 4 -101.5
1894
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-8 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
2,65 1a Service Area 5 3.4 -96.5
3,65 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -95.5
11,65 1b Service Area 4 4 -56.5
12,65 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.39 -66
13,65 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -63.5
14,65 1b Covered Area 5 5 0 -56
15,65 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -56.5
16,65 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -64
17,65 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -66
18,65 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.2 -49
19,65 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -58.5
20,65 1b Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -65.5
21,65 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -60.5
22,65 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -64
23,65 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -69.5
24,65 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -68.5
25,65 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -60
33,65 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -90.5
34,65 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -94
35,65 1a Service Area 4.5 3.4 -92
36,65 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -97.5
1,66 1a Service Area 3.4 3 -95.5
2,66 1a Service Area 3.4 3 -89
12,66 1b Service Area 4.5 4.5 -66.5
13,66 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -69
14,66 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -64
15,66 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -66.5
16,66 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -57.5
17,66 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -69
18,66 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -55
19,66 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -61
20,66 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -67
21,66 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -67.5
22,66 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -65.5
23,66 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -65.5
24,66 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -61.5
25,66 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -59.5
32,66 1a Service Area 4 4 -85
33,66 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -85.5
34,66 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.39 -89
35,66 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -82.5
36,66 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -90.5
37,66 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -89
40,66 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -88.5
1895
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-9 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
41,66 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -76
1,67 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -99.5
12,67 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -61.5
13,67 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -66
14,67 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -69.5
15,67 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -68.5
16,67 1b Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -61
17,67 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -56
18,67 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -51
19,67 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -66.5
20,67 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -53
21,67 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -66.5
22,67 1b Covered Area 4 4 0.2 -64.5
23,67 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -68.5
24,67 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -64.5
25,67 1a Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -60
26,67 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -67.5
27,67 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -53
28,67 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -64.5
29,67 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -74.5
30,67 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -76.5
31,67 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -81.5
32,67 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -83
33,67 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -78.5
34,67 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -75.5
35,67 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -73.5
36,67 1a Service Area 4 4 -82.5
37,67 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -63
38,67 1a Service Area 4.5 5 -92.5
39,67 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -94.5
40,67 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -88
41,67 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -85.5
12,68 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -67
13,68 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -62
14,68 1b Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -57
15,68 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -63.5
16,68 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -67
17,68 1b Covered Area 4.5 3.4 0 -67
18,68 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -69
19,68 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -67.5
20,68 1b Service Area 4.5 4 -63
21,68 1b Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -62
22,68 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -56.5
23,68 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -51.5
1896
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-10 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
24,68 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -54.5
25,68 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -50.5
26,68 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -66.5
27,68 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -55.5
28,68 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -44.5
29,68 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -57.5
30,68 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -66
31,68 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -67
32,68 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 2.15 -73.5
33,68 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -85
34,68 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -67.5
35,68 1a Service Area 4 4 -65.5
36,68 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -69.5
38,68 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -92
39,68 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -90.5
40,68 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -93.5
41,68 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -86.5
42,68 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -70
12,69 1b Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -58
13,69 1b Covered Area 5 4.5 0.2 -54.5
14,69 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -70.5
15,69 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -57
16,69 1b Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -60
17,69 1b Covered Area 4 5 0 -70
18,69 1b Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -70
19,69 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -64.5
20,69 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -74.5
21,69 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0.2 -52
22,69 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -51.5
23,69 1a Covered Area 5 4 0 -64
24,69 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -56
25,69 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -77.5
26,69 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -55.5
27,69 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -53.5
28,69 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -64
29,69 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -50.5
30,69 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -67.5
31,69 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -59
32,69 1a Covered Area 5 4 0 -68
33,69 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.78 -72
34,69 1a Covered Area 4 4 0.78 -75
35,69 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -79.5
36,69 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -83
38,69 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -90
1897
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-11 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
39,69 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -89.5
40,69 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -97
42,69 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -73.5
13,70 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -56
14,70 1b Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -59
15,70 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -56
17,70 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -62
18,70 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -69.5
19,70 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -62.5
20,70 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -66.5
21,70 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -52
22,70 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -58.5
23,70 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -61.5
24,70 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -69.5
25,70 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -57
26,70 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -67.5
27,70 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -50
28,70 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -58
29,70 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -53
30,70 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -59.5
31,70 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -57
32,70 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -78.5
33,70 1a Service Area 4 4 -81.5
34,70 1a Service Area 4 5 -72.5
35,70 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -81
36,70 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -53.5
40,70 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -68.5
41,70 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -60.5
42,70 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -78.5
43,70 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -90.5
44,70 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 7.44 -91.5
45,70 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -85.5
46,70 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -93.5
14,71 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -55
17,71 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -66
18,71 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -70
19,71 1b Covered Area 4 4 0 -65.5
20,71 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -77.5
21,71 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -71
22,71 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -72.5
23,71 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -76
24,71 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.39 -72
25,71 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -62.5
26,71 1a Covered Area 5 4 0 -67.5
1898
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-12 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
27,71 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -66.5
28,71 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -72.5
29,71 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -55.5
30,71 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -72
31,71 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -66
32,71 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.98 -80
33,71 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -86.5
34,71 1a Service Area 4 4 -59
35,71 1a Service Area 2 4.5 -65.5
37,71 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -57.5
38,71 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -68
39,71 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -68.5
40,71 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -78.5
17,72 1b Covered Area 4 3.4 0.39 -62.5
18,72 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -63.5
19,72 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.39 -75
20,72 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -71.5
21,72 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0.39 -72.5
22,72 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -70
23,72 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.1 -71.5
24,72 1a Covered Area 4 5 0.2 -78.5
25,72 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.39 -63.5
26,72 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -78
27,72 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -88.5
28,72 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -78
29,72 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -79
30,72 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -80
31,72 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -67.5
32,72 1a Covered Area 3.4 4.5 0 -77
33,72 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -65
34,72 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -49.5
35,72 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -49.5
36,72 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -66.5
37,72 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -75
38,72 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -75
39,72 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -71
16,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -75
17,73 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -68
18,73 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -77
19,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 1.075 -76.5
20,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0.2 -72
21,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -71
22,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -60.5
23,73 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -60.5
1899
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-13 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
24,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -67.5
25,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0.39 -70.5
26,73 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -68.5
27,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -82
28,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -75.5
29,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -81.5
30,73 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -77
31,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -66
32,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -67.5
33,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -48.5
34,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -59
35,73 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -57
36,73 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -58.5
37,73 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -61
38,73 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -73
39,73 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -74.5
40,73 1a Service Area 3.4 5 -80.5
41,73 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -83
16,74 1b Service Area 4 4 -75
17,74 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -73.5
19,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -78
20,74 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -76
21,74 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -68
22,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -72
23,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -72
24,74 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0.2 -72.5
25,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -72.5
26,74 1a Covered Area 4 4 0.59 -53
27,74 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -66.5
28,74 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -80
29,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -67.5
30,74 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -70
31,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -59
32,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -48.5
33,74 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -66
34,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -65.5
35,74 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -65
36,74 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -56.5
37,74 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -51.5
38,74 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -60.5
40,74 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -89
43,74 1a Service Area 0 4 -110.5
44,74 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -99
45,74 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -103.5
1900
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-14 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
17,75 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -75
18,75 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -68.5
19,75 1a Service Area 5 4.5 -76
20,75 1a Covered Area 5 5 0 -67.5
21,75 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -74.5
22,75 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -63
23,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -90
24,75 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -90
25,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -79.5
26,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -80.5
27,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -70.5
28,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -62.5
29,75 1a Covered Area 3.4 4.5 0 -65.5
30,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -57
31,75 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -53.5
32,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -58
33,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -60.5
34,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -79
36,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -44.5
37,75 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -53.5
38,75 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -46
42,75 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -90.5
43,75 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -93
44,75 1a Service Area 4 4 -91.5
45,75 1a Service Area 4 4 -86
17,76 1b Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -78
18,76 1b Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0.2 -77
19,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -74.5
20,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -77
21,76 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -81
22,76 1a Covered Area 5 3.4 0 -77.5
23,76 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -66.5
24,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -82
25,76 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -76.5
26,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -87.5
27,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -86
28,76 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -76.5
29,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -62
30,76 1a Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -69.5
31,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -63.5
32,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -80
33,76 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -79
34,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -56
35,76 1a Covered Area 3.4 5 0 -52.5
1901
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-15 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
36,76 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -44.5
37,76 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -60.5
38,76 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -48
39,76 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -83.5
40,76 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.59 -85
41,76 1a Covered Area 4 4 11.055 -90.5
42,76 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -100.5
43,76 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -91.5
21,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -79
22,77 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -90.5
23,77 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -82
24,77 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.39 -82.5
25,77 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -87
26,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -65
27,77 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -78
28,77 1a Service Area 4 4 -75
29,77 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -52
30,77 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -64.5
31,77 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -61.5
32,77 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -61.5
33,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -55.5
34,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -53.5
35,77 1a Service Area 4 4 -54.5
36,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -68
37,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -46
38,77 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -63
39,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -72
40,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -85.5
41,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -78
42,77 1a Covered Area 3.4 4.5 0 -74.5
43,77 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -71
44,77 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -60
23,78 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -78.5
24,78 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -76
25,78 1a Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -79
26,78 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -83
27,78 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -54.5
28,78 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -64.5
29,78 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -70.5
30,78 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -63.5
31,78 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -63
32,78 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -65.5
33,78 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0.2 -56.5
34,78 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -60
1902
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-16 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
35,78 1a Covered Area 4.5 3.4 0 -53.5
36,78 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -52
37,78 1a Covered Area 5 5 0 -76.5
38,78 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -75.5
39,78 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -72.5
40,78 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -77
41,78 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -71
42,78 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -51
43,78 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -73
24,79 1a Service Area 4 4 -79
25,79 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -82
26,79 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -78.5
27,79 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -74.5
28,79 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -82
29,79 1a Covered Area 4.5 5 0 -72.5
30,79 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -70
31,79 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -62
32,79 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -61.5
33,79 1a Covered Area 4 3.4 0 -66
34,79 1a Service Area 4 4 -52
35,79 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -65
36,79 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -54.5
37,79 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -49.5
38,79 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -67.5
39,79 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -59
40,79 1a Covered Area 4.5 3.4 0 -45
41,79 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -75
42,79 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -73.5
45,79 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -92.5
46,79 1a Service Area 4 4 -92
47,79 1a Service Area 4 4 -98.5
48,79 1a Service Area 3.4 4 -98.5
49,79 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -90.5
26,80 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -70.5
30,80 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -60
31,80 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -76.5
32,80 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -66
33,80 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -54
34,80 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -64
35,80 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -60
36,80 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -51
37,80 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -70.5
38,80 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -59
39,80 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -50
1903
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-17 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
40,80 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -63
41,80 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -78
43,80 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -79.5
44,80 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -88
31,81 1a Covered Area 3.4 4 0 -54.5
32,81 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -72
33,81 1a Covered Area 5 5 0 -68
34,81 1a Service Area 4.5 4.5 -52.5
35,81 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -46
36,81 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -60.5
37,81 1a Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -70.5
38,81 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -75.5
39,81 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -66
40,81 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -52
41,81 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -80.5
42,81 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -91
43,81 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -77
32,82 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -81
34,82 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -45
35,82 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -53.5
36,82 1a Covered Area 4 4 0.39 -88.5
38,82 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -87
39,82 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -63
40,82 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -54.5
34,83 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -71.5
35,83 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -64
36,83 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -70
37,83 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -88.5
38,83 1a Covered Area 3 4.5 0 -81.5
39,83 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -72
40,83 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -65.5
41,83 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -69.5
42,83 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -52.5
35,84 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -77.5
36,84 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -81
37,84 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -84.5
38,84 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -60.5
39,84 1a Covered Area 4.5 3.4 0 -62.5
40,84 1a Covered Area 4 5 0 -69
41,84 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -54.5
42,84 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -71.5
35,85 1a Covered Area 4.5 4.5 0 -59
36,85 1a Covered Area 5 4.5 0 -73.5
37,85 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -65.5
1904
AECOM Final Coverage Acceptance Test for Contra Costa County West Simlcast Cell F-18 Grid
Test
Sector Area
Talk-In
DAQ
Talk-Out
DAQ
Median
BER (%)
RSSI
(dBm)
38,85 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -77
39,85 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -69.5
35,86 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -67.5
36,86 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -86
37,86 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -77.5
38,86 1a Covered Area 4 4 0 -86.5
48,86 1a Service Area 4.5 5 -101.5
35,87 1a Service Area 4 4 -71
36,87 1a Covered Area 3.4 3.4 0 -78
37,87 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -78.5
38,87 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -75
47,87 1a Service Area 3.4 3.4 -97.5
48,87 1a Service Area 4 2 -99
38,88 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0 -74.5
43,88 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -77.5
44,88 1a Service Area 4.5 5 -77
45,88 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -89
46,88 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -79
47,88 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -85.5
38,89 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -60.5
39,89 1a Covered Area 4.5 4 0 -61.5
40,89 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -96
41,89 1a Service Area 5 4 -88.5
42,89 1a Service Area 4 4.5 -87
43,89 1a Covered Area 4 4.5 0.2 -76
46,89 1a Service Area 0 1 -110.5
47,89 1a Service Area 1 3.4 -110.5
39,90 1a Service Area 4 4 -91
40,90 1a Service Area 4 5 -89.5
41,90 1a Service Area 4.5 4 -87
42,90 1a Service Area 4 4 -85
43,90 1a Service Area 3.4 4.5 -85.5
44,90 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -83.5
45,90 1a Service Area 4 3.4 -85
46,90 1a Service Area 1 4.5 -104.5
42,91 1a Service Area 5 4.5 -85
43,91 1a Service Area 3.4 4.5 -88
44,91 1a Service Area 4 4 -93
45,91 1a Service Area 4 4 -99
1905
1,67
1,66 2,66
2,65 3,65
3,64
3,63 4,63
4,62
4,61
4,60 5,60 6,60
6,59 7,59 8,59 9,59
8,58 9,58
9,57
9,54
11,65
11,61
11,60
11,59
11,58
11,57
11,54
11,53
42,91 43,91 44,91 45,91
39,90 40,90 41,90 42,90 43,90 44,90 45,90 46,90
38,89 39,89 40,89 41,89 42,89 43,89 46,89 47,89
38,88 43,88 44,88 45,88 46,88 47,88
35,87 36,87 37,87 38,87 42,87 47,87 48,87
35,86 36,86 37,86 38,86 40,86 48,86
35,85 36,85 37,85 38,85 39,85
35,84 36,84 37,84 38,84 39,84 40,84 41,84 42,84
34,83 35,83 36,83 37,83 38,83 39,83 40,83 41,83 42,83
32,82 34,82 35,82 36,82 37,82 38,82 39,82 40,82
31,81 32,81 33,81 34,81 35,81 36,81 37,81 38,81 39,81 40,81 41,81 42,81 43,81 26,80 30,80 31,80 32,80 33,80 34,80 35,80 36,80 37,80 38,80 39,80 40,80 41,80 43,80 44,80 24,79 25,79 26,79 27,79 28,79 29,79 30,79 31,79 32,79 33,79 34,79 35,79 36,79 37,79 38,79 39,79 40,79 41,79 42,79 45,79 46,79 47,79 48,79 49,79 23,78 24,78 25,78 26,78 27,78 28,78 29,78 30,78 31,78 32,78 33,78 34,78 35,78 36,78 37,78 38,78 39,78 40,78 41,78 42,78 43,78 21,77 22,77 23,77 24,77 25,77 26,77 27,77 28,77 29,77 30,77 31,77 32,77 33,77 34,77 35,77 36,77 37,77 38,77 39,77 40,77 41,77 42,77 43,77 44,77 17,76 18,76 19,76 20,76 21,76 22,76 23,76 24,76 25,76 26,76 27,76 28,76 29,76 30,76 31,76 32,76 33,76 34,76 35,76 36,76 37,76 38,76 39,76 40,76 41,76 42,76 43,76 17,75 18,75 19,75 20,75 21,75 22,75 23,75 24,75 25,75 26,75 27,75 28,75 29,75 30,75 31,75 32,75 33,75 34,75 36,75 37,75 38,75 42,75 43,75 44,75 45,75 16,74 17,74 19,74 20,74 21,74 22,74 23,74 24,74 25,74 26,74 27,74 28,74 29,74 30,74 31,74 32,74 33,74 34,74 35,74 36,74 37,74 38,74 40,74 43,74 44,74 45,74 16,73 17,73 18,73 19,73 20,73 21,73 22,73 23,73 24,73 25,73 26,73 27,73 28,73 29,73 30,73 31,73 32,73 33,73 34,73 35,73 36,73 37,73 38,73 39,73 40,73 41,73 17,72 18,72 19,72 20,72 21,72 22,72 23,72 24,72 25,72 26,72 27,72 28,72 29,72 30,72 31,72 32,72 33,72 34,72 35,72 36,72 37,72 38,72 39,72 14,71 17,71 18,71 19,71 20,71 21,71 22,71 23,71 24,71 25,71 26,71 27,71 28,71 29,71 30,71 31,71 32,71 33,71 34,71 35,71 37,71 38,71 39,71 40,71 13,70 14,70 15,70 17,70 18,70 19,70 20,70 21,70 22,70 23,70 24,70 25,70 26,70 27,70 28,70 29,70 30,70 31,70 32,70 33,70 34,70 35,70 36,70 40,70 41,70 42,70 43,70 44,70 45,70 46,70 12,69 13,69 14,69 15,69 16,69 17,69 18,69 19,69 20,69 21,69 22,69 23,69 24,69 25,69 26,69 27,69 28,69 29,69 30,69 31,69 32,69 33,69 34,69 35,69 36,69 38,69 39,69 40,69 42,69 12,68 13,68 14,68 15,68 16,68 17,68 18,68 19,68 20,68 21,68 22,68 23,68 24,68 25,68 26,68 27,68 28,68 29,68 30,68 31,68 32,68 33,68 34,68 35,68 36,68 38,68 39,68 40,68 41,68 42,68 12,67 13,67 14,67 15,67 16,67 17,67 18,67 19,67 20,67 21,67 22,67 23,67 24,67 25,67 26,67 27,67 28,67 29,67 30,67 31,67 32,67 33,67 34,67 35,67 36,67 37,67 38,67 39,67 40,67 41,67 12,66 13,66 14,66 15,66 16,66 17,66 18,66 19,66 20,66 21,66 22,66 23,66 24,66 25,66 32,66 33,66 34,66 35,66 36,66 37,66 40,66 41,66 12,65 13,65 14,65 15,65 16,65 17,65 18,65 19,65 20,65 21,65 22,65 23,65 24,65 25,65 33,65 34,65 35,65 36,65 13,64 14,64 15,64 16,64 17,64 18,64 19,64 20,64 21,64 22,64 23,64 24,64 25,64 26,64 36,64 12,63 13,63 14,63 15,63 16,63 17,63 18,63 19,63 20,63 21,63 22,63 23,63 24,63 25,63 26,63 36,63 37,63 12,62 13,62 14,62 15,62 16,62 17,62 18,62 19,62 20,62 21,62 22,62 23,62 24,62 25,62 26,62 27,62 37,62 38,62 12,61 13,61 14,61 15,61 16,61 17,61 18,61 19,61 20,61 21,61 22,61 23,61 24,61 25,61 26,61 27,61 28,61 29,61 38,61 12,60 13,60 14,60 15,60 16,60 17,60 18,60 19,60 20,60 21,60 22,60 23,60 24,60 25,60 26,60 27,60 28,60 29,60 30,60 38,60 39,60 10,59 12,59 13,59 14,59 15,59 16,59 17,59 18,59 19,59 20,59 21,59 22,59 23,59 24,59 25,59 26,59 27,59 28,59 29,59 30,59 31,59 39,59 10,58 12,58 13,58 14,58 15,58 16,58 17,58 18,58 19,58 20,58 21,58 22,58 23,58 24,58 25,58 26,58 27,58 28,58 29,58 30,58 31,58 10,57 14,57 15,57 16,57 17,57 18,57 19,57 20,57 21,57 22,57 23,57 24,57 25,57 26,57 27,57 28,57 29,57 30,57 31,57 32,57 10,56 12,56 13,56 15,56 16,56 17,56 18,56 19,56 20,56 21,56 22,56 23,56 24,56 25,56 26,56 27,56 28,56 29,56 30,56 31,56 32,56 33,56 10,55 13,55 14,55 16,55 17,55 18,55 19,55 20,55 22,55 23,55 24,55 25,55 26,55 27,55 28,55 29,55 30,55 31,55 32,55 33,55 10,54 12,54 13,54 14,54 16,54 17,54 19,54 20,54 24,54 25,54 26,54 27,54 28,54 29,54 30,54 31,54 32,54 33,54 34,54 35,54 36,54 12,53 19,53 25,53 26,53 27,53 28,53 29,53 30,53 31,53 32,53 33,53 34,53 35,53 36,53 37,53 38,53 42,53 26,52 27,52 28,52 29,52 30,52 31,52 32,52 33,52 34,52 35,52 36,52 37,52 38,52 39,52 40,52 41,52 42,52 23,51 24,51 25,51 27,51 28,51 29,51 30,51 31,51 32,51 33,51 37,51 38,51 39,51 40,51 41,51 43,51 24,50 29,50 39,50 40,50 41,50 42,50
40,49 41,49 42,49 43,49 44,49
40,48 41,48 42,48 44,48 45,48
41,47 42,47 43,47 44,47 45,47
42,46 44,46 45,46 46,46
San Francisco
Berkeley Oakland
Vallejo
Richmond
Pinole
Hercules
Albany
Orinda
El Cerrito
San Pablo
El Sobrante
Benicia
RRooddeeoo
CCrroocckkeetttt
TTiibbuurroonn
KKeennssiinnggttoonn
TTaarraa HHiillllss
BBaayyvviieeww--MMoonnttaallvviinn
EEaasstt RRiicchhmmoonndd HHeeiigghhttss
PPoorrtt CCoossttaa
§¨¦580
UV123
UV24
UV123
San Pablo Dam
Giant
San Pablo
Cummings
Cedar
Rose
Solano
6Th
Marin
Arlington
University
Gilman
Alhambra Valley
Pomona
Key
Crockett
Pablo
Hopkins
Bancroft
S
pruce
Monterey
Dwight
Buchanan
Marin
AAnnggeell IIssllaanndd SSttaattee PPaarrkk EEaassttsshhoorree SSttaattee PPaarrkk CCeessaarr CChhaavveezz SSttaattee PPaarrkk
SSaann PPaabbllooBBaayy
SSaann FFrraanncciissccooBBaayy
CCaarrqquuiinneezzSSttrraaiigghhtt
SSaann RRaaffaaeellBBaayy
RRiicchhmmoonnddIInnnneerr HHaarrbboorr
SSaann PPaabbllooRReesseerrvvooiirr
HHaarrbboorr CChhaannnneell
BBrriioonneess RReesseerrvvooiirr
RRiicchhmmoonnddMMaarriinnaa BBaayy
SSaann PPaabblo Canal lo Canal
SSaannttaaFFeeCChhaannnneell
RReesseerrvvooiirr
AAnnzzaaLLaakkee
HHiillllttoopp LLaakkee
LLaauurritzen Channel itzen Channel
SSwwaannzzyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
MMaalloonneeyy RReesseerrvvooiirr
PPaarrrr--RRich Canal ich Canal
JJeewweellLLaakkee
Figure F-1
Tile Numbers
APPROVED:

GDM - 15 July 2011
DESIGN:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

REV
DATA SOURCE AND NOTES:

FILE NAME:
.

PROJECT NO: 60175932
CLIENT: EBRCSA
Shape File data provided from ESRI
M:\Projects\Radio Projects\60091361_20175 EBRCSA\
Task E.00 RaCE Testing\CCCO West\Maps\
Figure F-1 Two_Way DAQ Test with Tile Numbers.mxd
MJL - 15 July 2011
MJL - 15 July 2011
GDM - 15 July 2011

DATE APPROVED BY
(434 ) 239-9200 www.aecom.com

TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.
20715 TIMBERLAKE ROAD SUITE 106
LYNCHBURG, VA 24502
Medium Building
Portable on the Street
1906
About AECOM
AECOM (NYSE: ACM) is a global provider of
professional technical and management support
services to a broad range of markets, including
transportation, facilities, environmental, energy, water and government. With approximately 45,000 employees
around the world, AECOM is a leader in all of the key
markets that it serves. AECOM provides a blend of
global reach, local knowledge, innovation, and
collaborative technical excellence in delivering solutions that enhance and sustain the world’s built, natural, and social environments. A Fortune 500 company, AECOM
serves clients in more than 100 countries and has
annual revenue in excess of $6 billion.

More information on AECOM and its services can be
found at www.aecom.com.
20715 Timberlake Rd
Suite 106
Lynchburg, VA 24502
434.239.9200
1907
1908
1909
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
173

5.10 SYSTEMS AND COMMUNICATIONS PROTECTION (SC)
Examples of systems and communications safeguards range from boundary and transmission protection to securing an agency’s virtualized environment. In addition, applications, services, or information systems must have the capability to ensure system integrity through the detection and protection against unauthorized changes to software and information. This section details the requirements for protecting systems and communications infrastructures.

SC-1 POLICY AND PROCEDURES
[Priority 2]
Control:
a. Develop, document, and disseminate to organizational personnel with system and communications protection responsibilities:

1. Agency-level system and communications protection policy that:
(a) Addresses purpose, scope, roles, responsibilities, management commitment, coordination among organizational entities, and compliance; and (b) Is consistent with applicable laws, executive orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, and guidelines; and

2. Procedures to facilitate the implementation of the system and communications protection policy and the associated system and communications protection controls; b. Designate organizational personnel with information security responsibilities to manage the development, documentation, and dissemination of the system and communications protection policy and procedures; and
c. Review and update the current system and communications protection:

1. Policy annually and following any changes and security incidents involving unauthorized access to CJI or systems used to process, store, or transmit CJI; and

2. Procedures annually and following any changes and security incidents involving unauthorized access to CJI or systems used to process, store, or transmit CJI.

Discussion: System and communications protection policy and procedures address the controls in the SC family that are implemented within systems and organizations. The risk management strategy is an important factor in establishing such policies and procedures. Policies and procedures contribute to security and privacy assurance. Therefore, it is important that security and privacy programs collaborate on the development of system and communications protection policy and procedures. Security and privacy program policies and procedures at the organization level are preferable, in general, and may obviate the need for mission- or system-specific policies and procedures. The policy can be included as part of the general security and privacy policy or be represented by multiple policies that reflect the complex nature of organizations. Procedures can be established for security and privacy programs, for mission or business processes, and for systems, if needed. Procedures describe how the policies or controls are implemented and can be directed at the individual or role that is the object of the procedure. Procedures can be documented in system security and privacy plans or in one or more separate documents. Events that may 1910
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
174
precipitate an update to system and communications protection policy and procedures include assessment or audit findings, security incidents or breaches, or changes in applicable laws, executive orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, and guidelines. Simply restating controls does not constitute an organizational policy or procedure.

Related Controls: PS-8, SA-8, SI-12.

SC-2 SEPARATION OF SYSTEM AND USER FUNCTIONALITY
[Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:

Separate user functionality, including user interface services, from system management functionality.

Discussion: System management functionality includes functions that are necessary to administer databases, network components, workstations, or servers. These functions typically require privileged user access. The separation of user functions from system management functions is physical or logical. Organizations may separate system management functions from user functions by using different computers, instances of operating systems, central processing units, or network addresses; by employing virtualization techniques; or some combination of these or other methods.

Separation of system management functions from user functions includes web administrative interfaces that employ separate authentication methods for users of any other system resources.

Separation of system and user functions may include isolating administrative interfaces on different domains and with additional access controls. The separation of system and user functionality can be achieved by applying the systems security engineering design principles in SA-8.

Related Controls: AC-6, SA-4, SA-8, SC-7, SC-22, SC-39.

SC-4 INFORMATION IN SHARED SYSTEM RESOURCES
[Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:

Prevent unauthorized and unintended information transfer via shared system resources.

Discussion: Preventing unauthorized and unintended information transfer via shared system resources stops information produced by the actions of prior users or roles (or the actions of processes acting on behalf of prior users or roles) from being available to current users or roles (or current processes acting on behalf of current users or roles) that obtain access to shared system resources after those resources have been released back to the system. Information in shared system resources also applies to encrypted representations of information. In other contexts, control of information in shared system resources is referred to as object reuse and residual information protection. Information in shared system resources does not address information remanence, which refers to the residual representation of data that has been nominally deleted; covert channels (including storage and timing channels), where shared system resources are 1911
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
175
manipulated to violate information flow restrictions; or components within systems for which there are only single users or roles.

Related Controls: AC-3, AC-4, SA-8.

SC-5 DENIAL-OF-SERVICE PROTECTION
[Priority 2]
Control:
a. Protect against or limit the effects of the following types of denial-of-service events:
distributed denial of service, DNS Denial of Service, etc.; and b. Employ the following controls to achieve the denial-of-service objective: boundary protection devices and intrusion detection or prevention devices.

Discussion: Denial-of-service events may occur due to a variety of internal and external causes, such as an attack by an adversary or a lack of planning to support organizational needs with respect to capacity and bandwidth. Such attacks can occur across a wide range of network protocols (e.g., IPv4, IPv6). A variety of technologies are available to limit or eliminate the origination and effects of denial-of-service events. For example, boundary protection devices can filter certain types of packets to protect system components on internal networks from being directly affected by or the source of denial-of-service attacks. Employing increased network capacity and bandwidth combined with service redundancy also reduces the susceptibility to denial-of-service events.

Related Controls: CP-2, IR-4, SC-7.

SC-7 BOUNDARY PROTECTION
[Existing] [Priority 1]
Control:
a. Monitor and control communications at the external managed interfaces to the system and at key internal managed interfaces within the system;
b. Implement subnetworks for publicly accessible system components that are physically or logically separated from internal organizational networks; and c. Connect to external networks or systems only through managed interfaces consisting of boundary protection devices arranged in accordance with an organizational security and privacy architecture.

Discussion: Managed interfaces include gateways, routers, firewalls, guards, network-based malicious code analysis, virtualization systems, or encrypted tunnels implemented within a security architecture. Subnetworks that are physically or logically separated from internal networks are referred to as demilitarized zones or DMZs. Restricting or prohibiting interfaces within organizational systems includes restricting external web traffic to designated web servers within managed interfaces, prohibiting external traffic that appears to be spoofing internal addresses, and prohibiting internal traffic that appears to be spoofing external addresses. [SP 800- 1912
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
176
189] provides additional information on source address validation techniques to prevent ingress and egress of traffic with spoofed addresses. Commercial telecommunications services are provided by network components and consolidated management systems shared by customers.

These services may also include third party-provided access lines and other service elements. Such services may represent sources of increased risk despite contract security provisions. Boundary protection may be implemented as a common control for all or part of an organizational network such that the boundary to be protected is greater than a system-specific boundary (i.e., an authorization boundary).

Related Controls: AC-4, AC-17, AC-18, AC-19, AC-20, CA-3, CM-2, CM-4, CM-7, CM-10, CP8, CP-10, IR-4, MA-4, PE-3, PL-8, SA-8, SC-5.

Control Enhancements:
(3) BOUNDARY PROTECTION | ACCESS POINTS
[Priority 1]
Control:

Limit the number of external network connections to the system.

Discussion: Limiting the number of external network connections facilitates monitoring of inbound and outbound communications traffic. A Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) initiative is an example of a federal guideline that requires limits on the number of external network connections. Limiting the number of external network connections to the system is important during transition periods from older to newer technologies (e.g., transitioning from IPv4 to IPv6 network protocols). Such transitions may require implementing the older and newer technologies simultaneously during the transition period and thus increase the number of access points to the system.

Related Controls: None.
(4) BOUNDARY PROTECTION | EXTERNAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES [Priority 1]
Control:
a. Implement a managed interface for each external telecommunication service; b. Establish a traffic flow policy for each managed interface; c. Protect the confidentiality and integrity of the information being transmitted across each interface;
d. Document each exception to the traffic flow policy with a supporting mission or business need and duration of that need;
e. Review exceptions to the traffic flow policy annually, after any incident, and after any major changes impacting the information system, while removing exceptions that are no longer supported by an explicit mission or business need;
f. Prevent unauthorized exchange of control plane traffic with external networks; 1913
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
177
g. Publish information to enable remote networks to detect unauthorized control plane traffic from internal networks; and
h. Filter unauthorized control plane traffic from external networks.

Discussion: External telecommunications services can provide data and/or voice communications services. Examples of control plane traffic include Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routing, Domain Name System (DNS), and management protocols. See [SP 800-189] for additional information on the use of the resource public key infrastructure (RPKI) to protect BGP routes and detect unauthorized BGP announcements.

Related Controls: AC-3, SC-8, SC-20, SC-21, SC-22.
(5) BOUNDARY PROTECTION | DENY BY DEFAULT — ALLOW BY EXCEPTION [Priority 1]
Control:

Deny network communications traffic by default and allow network communications traffic by exception at boundary devices for information systems used to process, store, or transmit CJI.

Discussion: Denying by default and allowing by exception applies to inbound and outbound network communications traffic. A deny-all, permit-by-exception network communications traffic policy ensures that only those system connections that are essential and approved are allowed.

Deny by default, allow by exception also applies to a system that is connected to an external system.

Related Controls: None.
(7) BOUNDARY PROTECTION | SPLIT TUNNELING FOR REMOTE DEVICES [Priority 1]
Control:

Prevent split tunneling for remote devices connecting to organizational systems.

Discussion: Split tunneling is the process of allowing a remote user or device to establish a nonremote connection with a system and simultaneously communicate via some other connection to a resource in an external network. This method of network access enables a user to access remote devices and simultaneously, access uncontrolled networks. Split tunneling might be desirable by remote users to communicate with local system resources, such as printers or file servers.

However, split tunneling can facilitate unauthorized external connections, making the system vulnerable to attack and to exfiltration of organizational information. Split tunneling can be prevented by disabling configuration settings that allow such capability in remote devices and by preventing those configuration settings from being configurable by users. Prevention can also be achieved by the detection of split tunneling (or of configuration settings that allow split tunneling) in the remote device, and by prohibiting the connection if the remote device is using split tunneling.

A virtual private network (VPN) can be used to securely provision a split tunnel. A securely provisioned VPN includes locking connectivity to exclusive, managed, and named environments, or to a specific set of pre-approved addresses, without user control.

Related Controls: None.
1914
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
178
(8) BOUNDARY PROTECTION | ROUTE TRAFFIC TO AUTHENTICATED PROXY SERVERS [Existing] [Priority 1]
Control:

Route all internal communications traffic that may be proxied, except traffic specifically exempted by organizational personnel with information security responsibilities, to all untrusted networks through authenticated proxy servers at managed interfaces.

Discussion: External networks are networks outside of organizational control. A proxy server is a server (i.e., system or application) that acts as an intermediary for clients requesting system resources from non-organizational or other organizational servers. System resources that may be requested include files, connections, web pages, or services. Client requests established through a connection to a proxy server are assessed to manage complexity and provide additional protection by limiting direct connectivity. Web content filtering devices are one of the most common proxy servers that provide access to the Internet. Proxy servers can support the logging of Transmission Control Protocol sessions and the blocking of specific Uniform Resource Locators, Internet Protocol addresses, and domain names. Web proxies can be configured with organization-defined lists of authorized and unauthorized websites. Note that proxy servers may inhibit the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) and create the potential for “man-in-the-middle” attacks (depending on the implementation).

Related Controls: AC-3.
(24) BOUNDARY PROTECTION | PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION [Priority 1]
Control:

For systems that process personally identifiable information:
a. Apply the following processing rules to data elements of personally identifiable information:
all applicable laws, executive orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, and guidelines;
b. Monitor for permitted processing at the external interfaces to the system and at key internal boundaries within the system;
c. Document each processing exception; and
d. Review and remove exceptions that are no longer supported.

Discussion: Managing the processing of personally identifiable information is an important aspect of protecting an individual’s privacy. Applying, monitoring for, and documenting exceptions to processing rules ensure that personally identifiable information is processed only in accordance with established privacy requirements.

Related Controls: None.

SC-8 TRANSMISSION CONFIDENTIALITY AND INTEGRITY
[Existing] [Priority 2]
1915
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
179
Control:

Protect the confidentiality and integrity of transmitted information.

Metadata derived from unencrypted CJI shall be protected in the same manner as CJI and shall not be used for any advertising or other commercial purposes by any cloud service provider or other associated entity.

Discussion: Protecting the confidentiality and integrity of transmitted information applies to internal and external networks as well as any system components that can transmit information, including servers, notebook computers, desktop computers, mobile devices, printers, copiers, scanners, facsimile machines, and radios. Unprotected communication paths are exposed to the possibility of interception and modification. Protecting the confidentiality and integrity of information can be accomplished by physical or logical means. Physical protection can be achieved by using protected distribution systems. A protected distribution system is a wireline or fiber-optics telecommunications system that includes terminals and adequate electromagnetic, acoustical, electrical, and physical controls to permit its use for the unencrypted transmission of classified information. Logical protection can be achieved by employing encryption techniques.

Organizations that rely on commercial providers who offer transmission services as commodity services rather than as fully dedicated services may find it difficult to obtain the necessary assurances regarding the implementation of needed controls for transmission confidentiality and integrity. In such situations, organizations determine what types of confidentiality or integrity services are available in standard, commercial telecommunications service packages. If it is not feasible to obtain the necessary controls and assurances of control effectiveness through appropriate contracting vehicles, organizations can implement appropriate compensating controls.

The agency may permit limited use of metadata derived from unencrypted CJI when specifically approved by the agency and its “intended use” is detailed within the service agreement. Such authorized uses of metadata may include but are not limited to the following: spam and spyware filtering, data loss prevention, spillage reporting, transaction logs (events and content–similar to the AU controls), data usage/indexing metrics, and diagnostic/syslog data.

Related Controls: AC-17, AC-18, IA-3, IA-8, MA-4, PE-4, SA-4, SA-8, SC-7, SC-20, SC-23, SC28.

Control Enhancements:
(1) TRANSMISSION CONFIDENTIALITY AND INTEGRITY | CRYPTOGRAPHIC

PROTECTION
[Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:

Implement cryptographic mechanisms to prevent unauthorized disclosure and detect unauthorized changes or access to CJI during transmission.

Discussion: Encryption protects information from unauthorized disclosure and modification during transmission. Cryptographic mechanisms that protect the confidentiality and integrity of information during transmission include TLS and IPSec. Cryptographic mechanisms used to 1916
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
180
protect information integrity include cryptographic hash functions that have applications in digital signatures, checksums, and message authentication codes.

Related Controls: SC-12, SC-13.

SC-10 NETWORK DISCONNECT
[Priority 3]
Control:

Terminate the network connection associated with a communications session at the end of the session or after one (1) hour of inactivity.

NOTE: In the interest of safety, devices that are: (1) part of a criminal justice conveyance; or (2) used to perform dispatch functions and located within a physically secure location; or (3) terminals designated solely for the purpose of receiving alert notifications (i.e., receive only terminals or ROT) and used within physically secure location facilities that remain staffed when in operation, are exempt from this requirement.

Discussion: Network disconnect applies to internal and external networks. Terminating network connections associated with specific communications sessions includes de-allocating TCP/IP address or port pairs at the operating system level and de-allocating the networking assignments at the application level if multiple application sessions are using a single operating system-level network connection. Periods of inactivity may be established by organizations and include time periods by type of network access or for specific network accesses.

Related Controls: AC-17, SC-23.

SC-12 CRYPTOGRAPHIC KEY ESTABLISHMENT AND MANAGEMENT
[Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:

Establish and manage cryptographic keys when cryptography is employed within the system in accordance with the following key management requirements: encryption key generation, distribution, storage, access, and destruction is controlled by the agency.

Discussion: Cryptographic key management and establishment can be performed using manual procedures or automated mechanisms with supporting manual procedures. Organizations define key management requirements in accordance with applicable laws, executive orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, and guidelines and specify appropriate options, parameters, and levels. Organizations manage trust stores to ensure that only approved trust anchors are part of such trust stores. This includes certificates with visibility external to organizational systems and certificates related to the internal operations of systems. [NIST CMVP] and [NIST CAVP] provide additional information on validated cryptographic modules and algorithms that can be used in cryptographic key management and establishment.

Related Controls: AC-17, AU-9, CM-3, IA-3, IA-7, SA-4, SA-8, SA-9, SC-8, SC-12, SC-13, SC17, SC-20, SI-3, SI-7. 1917
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
181
SC-13 CRYPTOGRAPHIC PROTECTION
[Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:
a. Determine the use of encryption for CJI in-transit when outside a physically secure location; and
b. Implement the following types of cryptography required for each specified cryptographic use: cryptographic modules which are Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-3 certified, or FIPS validated algorithm for symmetric key encryption and decryption (FIPS 197 [AES]), with a symmetric cipher key of at least 128-bit strength for CJI in-transit.

NOTE: Subsequent versions of approved cryptographic modules that are under current review for FIPS 140-3 compliancy can be used in the interim until certification is complete. FIPS 140-2 certificates will not be acceptable after September 21, 2026.

Discussion: Cryptography can be employed to support a variety of security solutions, including the protection of classified information and controlled unclassified information, the provision and implementation of digital signatures, and the enforcement of information separation when authorized individuals have the necessary clearances but lack the necessary formal access approvals. Cryptography can also be used to support random number and hash generation.

Generally applicable cryptographic standards include FIPS-validated cryptography and NSAapproved cryptography. For example, organizations that need to protect classified information may specify the use of NSA-approved cryptography. Organizations that need to provision and implement digital signatures may specify the use of FIPS-validated cryptography. Cryptography is implemented in accordance with applicable laws, executive orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, and guidelines.

Related Controls: AC-2, AC-3, AC-7, AC-17, AC-18, AC-19, AU-9, CM-11, CP-9, IA-3, IA-5, IA-7, MA-4, MP-2, MP-4, MP-5, SA-4, SA-8, SA-9, SC-8, SC-12, SC-20, SC-23, SC-28, SI-3, SI-7.

SC-15 COLLABORATIVE COMPUTING DEVICES AND APPLICATIONS
[Priority 2]
Control:
a. Prohibit remote activation of collaborative computing devices and applications; and b. Provide an explicit indication of use to users physically present at the devices.

Discussion: Collaborative computing devices and applications include remote meeting devices and applications, networked white boards, cameras, and microphones. The explicit indication of use includes signals to users when collaborative computing devices and applications are activated.

Related Controls: AC-21.
1918
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
182
SC-17 PUBLIC KEY INFRASTRUCTURE CERTIFICATES
[Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:
a. Issue public key certificates under an agency-level certificate authority or obtain public key certificates from an approved service provider; and
b. Include only approved trust anchors in trust stores or certificate stores managed by the organization.

Discussion: Public key infrastructure (PKI) certificates are certificates with visibility external to organizational systems and certificates related to the internal operations of systems, such as application-specific time services. In cryptographic systems with a hierarchical structure, a trust anchor is an authoritative source (i.e., a certificate authority) for which trust is assumed and not derived. A root certificate for a PKI system is an example of a trust anchor. A trust store or certificate store maintains a list of trusted root certificates.

Related Controls: IA-5, SC-12.

SC-18 MOBILE CODE
[Priority 3]
Control:
a. Define acceptable and unacceptable mobile code and mobile code technologies; and b. Authorize, monitor, and control the use of mobile code within the system.

Discussion: Mobile code includes any program, application, or content that can be transmitted across a network (e.g., embedded in an email, document, or website) and executed on a remote system. Decisions regarding the use of mobile code within organizational systems are based on the potential for the code to cause damage to the systems if used maliciously. Mobile code technologies include Java applets, JavaScript, HTML5, WebGL, and VBScript. Usage restrictions and implementation guidelines apply to both the selection and use of mobile code installed on servers and mobile code downloaded and executed on individual workstations and devices, including notebook computers and smart phones. Mobile code policy and procedures address specific actions taken to prevent the development, acquisition, and introduction of unacceptable mobile code within organizational systems, including requiring mobile code to be digitally signed by a trusted source.

Related Controls: AU-2, AU-12, CM-2, CM-6, SI-3.

SC-20 SECURE NAME/ADDRESS RESOLUTION SERVICE (AUTHORITATIVE

SOURCE)
[Priority 2]
Control:
1919
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
183
a. Provide additional data origin authentication and integrity verification artifacts along with the authoritative name resolution data the system returns in response to external name/address resolution queries; and
b. Provide the means to indicate the security status of child zones and (if the child supports secure resolution services) to enable verification of a chain of trust among parent and child domains, when operating as part of a distributed, hierarchical namespace.

Discussion: Providing authoritative source information enables external clients, including remote Internet clients, to obtain origin authentication and integrity verification assurances for the host/service name to network address resolution information obtained through the service. Systems that provide name and address resolution services include domain name system (DNS) servers.

Additional artifacts include DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) digital signatures and cryptographic keys. Authoritative data includes DNS resource records. The means for indicating the security status of child zones include the use of delegation signer resource records in the DNS.

Systems that use technologies other than the DNS to map between host and service names and network addresses provide other means to assure the authenticity and integrity of response data.

Related Controls: SC-8, SC-12, SC-13, SC-21, SC-22.

SC-21 SECURE NAME/ADDRESS RESOLUTION SERVICE (RECURSIVE OR

CACHING RESOLVER)
[Priority 2]
Control:

Request and perform data origin authentication and data integrity verification on the name/address resolution responses the system receives from authoritative sources.

Discussion: Each client of name resolution services either performs this validation on its own or has authenticated channels to trusted validation providers. Systems that provide name and address resolution services for local clients include recursive resolving or caching domain name system (DNS) servers. DNS client resolvers either perform validation of DNSSEC signatures, or clients use authenticated channels to recursive resolvers that perform such validations. Systems that use technologies other than the DNS to map between host and service names and network addresses provide some other means to enable clients to verify the authenticity and integrity of response data.

Related Controls: SC-20, SC-22.

SC-22 ARCHITECTURE AND PROVISIONING FOR NAME/ADDRESS RESOLUTION

SERVICE
[Priority 2]
Control:

Ensure the systems that collectively provide name/address resolution service for an organization are fault-tolerant and implement internal and external role separation. 1920
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
184
Discussion: Systems that provide name and address resolution services include domain name system (DNS) servers. To eliminate single points of failure in systems and enhance redundancy, organizations employ at least two authoritative domain name system servers—one configured as the primary server and the other configured as the secondary server. Additionally, organizations typically deploy the servers in two geographically separated network subnetworks (i.e., not located in the same physical facility). For role separation, DNS servers with internal roles only process name and address resolution requests from within organizations (i.e., from internal clients). DNS servers with external roles only process name and address resolution information requests from clients external to organizations (i.e., on external networks, including the Internet). Organizations specify clients that can access authoritative DNS servers in certain roles (e.g., by address ranges and explicit lists).

Related Controls: SC-2, SC-20, SC-21.

SC-23 SESSION AUTHENTICITY
[Priority 2]
Control:

Protect the authenticity of communications sessions.

Discussion: Protecting session authenticity addresses communications protection at the session level, not at the packet level. Such protection establishes grounds for confidence at both ends of communications sessions in the ongoing identities of other parties and the validity of transmitted information. Authenticity protection includes protecting against “man-in-the-middle” attacks, session hijacking, and the insertion of false information into sessions.

Related Controls: SC-8, SC-10.

SC-28 PROTECTION OF INFORMATION AT REST
[Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:

Protect the confidentiality and integrity of the following information at rest: CJI when outside physically secure locations using cryptographic modules which are certified FIPS 140-3 with a symmetric cipher key of at least 128-bit strength, or FIPS 197 with a symmetric cipher key of at least 256-bit strength.

Metadata derived from unencrypted CJI shall be protected in the same manner as CJI and shall not be used for any advertising or other commercial purposes by any cloud service provider or other associated entity.

The storage of CJI, regardless of encryption status, shall only be permitted in cloud environments (e.g., government or third-party/commercial datacenters, etc.) which reside within the physical boundaries of APB-member country (i.e., United States, U.S. territories, Indian Tribes, and Canada) and are under legal authority of an APB-member agency (i.e., United States– federal/state/territory, Indian Tribe, or the Royal Canadian Mounted Police). 1921
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
185
Note: This restriction does not apply to exchanges of CJI with foreign government agencies under international exchange agreements (e.g., the Preventing and Combating Serious Crime agreements, fugitive extracts, and exchanges made for humanitarian and criminal investigatory purposes in particular circumstances).

Discussion: Information at rest refers to the state of information when it is not in process or in transit and is located on system components. Such components include internal or external hard disk drives, storage area network devices, or databases. However, the focus of protecting information at rest is not on the type of storage device or frequency of access but rather on the state of the information. Information at rest addresses the confidentiality and integrity of information and covers user information and system information. System-related information that requires protection includes configurations or rule sets for firewalls, intrusion detection and prevention systems, filtering routers, and authentication information. Organizations may employ different mechanisms to achieve confidentiality and integrity protections, including the use of cryptographic mechanisms and file share scanning. Integrity protection can be achieved, for example, by implementing write-once-read-many (WORM) technologies. When adequate protection of information at rest cannot otherwise be achieved, organizations may employ other controls, including frequent scanning to identify malicious code at rest and secure offline storage in lieu of online storage. The agency may permit limited use of metadata derived from unencrypted CJI when specifically approved by the agency and its “intended use” is detailed within the service agreement. Such authorized uses of metadata may include but are not limited to the following:
spam and spyware filtering, data loss prevention, spillage reporting, transaction logs (events and content–similar to the AU controls), data usage/indexing metrics, and diagnostic/syslog data.

Related Controls: AC-3, AC-4, AC-6, AC-19, CA-7, CM-3, CM-5, CM-6, CP-9, MP-4, MP-5, PE-3, SC-8, SC-12, SC-13, SI-3, SI-7, SI-16.

Control Enhancements:
(1) PROTECTION OF INFORMATION AT REST | CRYPTOGRAPHIC PROTECTION [Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:

Implement cryptographic mechanisms to prevent unauthorized disclosure and modification of the following information at rest on information systems and digital media outside physically secure locations: CJI.

Discussion: The selection of cryptographic mechanisms is based on the need to protect the confidentiality and integrity of organizational information. The strength of mechanism is commensurate with the security category or classification of the information. Organizations have the flexibility to encrypt information on system components or media or encrypt data structures, including files, records, or fields.

Related Controls: AC-19, SC-12, SC-13.
1922
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
186
SC-39 PROCESS ISOLATION
[Existing] [Priority 2]
Control:

Maintain a separate execution domain for each executing system process.

Discussion: Systems can maintain separate execution domains for each executing process by assigning each process a separate address space. Each system process has a distinct address space so that communication between processes is performed in a manner controlled through the security functions, and one process cannot modify the executing code of another process. Maintaining separate execution domains for executing processes can be achieved, for example, by implementing separate address spaces. Process isolation technologies, including sandboxing or virtualization, logically separate software and firmware from other software, firmware, and data.

Process isolation helps limit the access of potentially untrusted software to other system resources.

The capability to maintain separate execution domains is available in commercial operating systems that employ multi-state processor technologies.

Related Controls: AC-3, AC-4, AC-6, SA-8, SC-2, SI-16.

Figure 13 – System and Communications Protection and Information Integrity Use Cases Use Case 1 – A Local Police Department’s Information Systems & Communications Protections A local police department implemented a replacement CAD system within a physically secure location that was authorized to process CJI using a FIPS 140-2 encrypted VPN tunnel over the Internet to the state’s CSA. In addition to the policies, physical and personnel controls already in place, the police department employed firewalls both at their border and at key points within their network, intrusion detection systems, a patch-management strategy that included automatic patch updates where possible, virus scanners, spam and spyware detection mechanisms that update signatures automatically, and subscribed to various security alert mailing lists and addressed vulnerabilities raised through the alerts as needed.

Use Case 2 – Faxing from a Single/Multi-function Device over a Traditional Telephone Line A dispatcher from county A runs a NCIC query on an individual. The results are printed and then sent to an adjoining county using a single/multi-function device with facsimile capability. For faxing, the device is only connected to a traditional telephone line as is the device at the receiving county. Encryption of a document containing CJI is not required because the document travels over a traditional telephone line.

Use Case 3 – Faxing from a Multi-function Device over a Network 1923
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
187
A dispatcher from city A runs a NCIC query on an individual. The results are printed and the dispatcher uses a multi-function copier to fax the file to a city in another state. The dispatcher enters the fax number of the receiver and sends the document. The document containing CJI is automatically converted to a digital file and routed to the receiver over the agency network and the Internet. Because the device uses a network and the Internet for transmitting documents containing CJI, encryption in transit using FIPS 140-2 certified 128 bit symmetric encryption is required.
1924
07/09/2024
CJISSECPOL v5.9.5
194

5.13 Policy Area 13: Mobile Devices
This policy area describes considerations and requirements for mobile devices including smartphones and tablets. Mobile devices are not limited to a single form factor or communications medium. The requirements in this section augment those in other areas of the Policy to address the gaps introduced by using mobile devices.

The agency shall: (i) establish usage restrictions and implementation guidance for mobile devices; and (ii) authorize, monitor, control wireless access to the information system. Wireless technologies, in the simplest sense, enable one or more devices to communicate without physical connections—without requiring network or peripheral cabling.

Appendix G provides reference material and additional information on mobile devices.

5.13.1 Wireless Communications Technologies
Examples of wireless communication technologies include, but are not limited to: 802.11, cellular, Bluetooth, satellite, microwave, and land mobile radio (LMR). Wireless technologies require at least the minimum security applied to wired technology and, based upon the specific technology or implementation, wireless technologies may require additional security controls as described below.

5.13.1.1 802.11 Wireless Protocols
Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) and Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA) cryptographic algorithms, used by all pre-802.11i protocols, do not meet the requirements for FIPS 140-2 and shall not be used.

Agencies shall implement the following controls for all agency-managed wireless access points with access to an agency’s network that processes unencrypted CJI:

1. Perform validation testing to ensure rogue APs (Access Points) do not exist in the 802.11 Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) and to fully understand the wireless network security posture.

2. Maintain a complete inventory of all Access Points (APs) and 802.11 wireless devices.

3. Place APs in secured areas to prevent unauthorized physical access and user manipulation.

4. Test AP range boundaries to determine the precise extent of the wireless coverage and design the AP wireless coverage to limit the coverage area to only what is needed for operational purposes.

5. Enable user authentication and encryption mechanisms for the management interface of the AP.

6. Ensure that all APs have strong administrative passwords and ensure that all passwords are changed in accordance with Section 5.6.2.1.

7. Ensure the reset function on APs is used only when needed and is only invoked by authorized personnel. Restore the APs to the latest security settings, when the reset functions are used, to ensure the factory default settings are not utilized. 1925

Page 1 of 2 ends
← All documents from this meeting