This is the html version of the file http://texasvipers.securespsites.com/PREMAC/RICP/PanhandleRICPPre-ApprReview.pdf.
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
Page 1
ii
State Planning Region 1
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
(RICP)
Includes
Volume I: Regional Governance & Regional Interoperable
Migration Plan
Volume II: Regional Standard Operating Procedures & Texas
Statewide Interoperability Channel Plan
Map Courtesy of Texas Association of Regional Councils
Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
February 2010
Page 2
ii
State Planning Region 1
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
Approval & Authorization Page
On February 25, 2010 the Board of Directors of the Panhandle Regional
Planning Commission, on behalf of its member jurisdictions, adopted the
State Planning Region 1 Regional Interoperability Communications Plan
(RICP).
The Panhandle Regional Planning Commission membership includes all
eighty-eight City and County jurisdictions located in the 26-county
Panhandle region of Texas. This plan affects all local jurisdictions and all
local law enforcement, fire service, emergency medical service, emergency
management, and public works agencies operating in the region.
Attest:
__________________________________
______________________
Gary Pitner, Executive Director
Date
Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Page 3
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page iii
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
Record of Change
Change No.
Description
Change Date
Approved By
001
Pre-approval Draft
2/3/2009
D.Cann
This Regional Interoperable Communications Plan (RICP) is subject to information and/or
equipment updates and changes. The use of this Record of Change helps manage the RICP
modifications throughout the life of this document.
Page 4
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 1
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
RICP Volume I
The Regional Interoperable Communications Plan (RICP) is divided into two volumes for ease of
revisions and approvals for (1) the distribution of funding and build-out and migration of regional
communications system(s) to P25 Compliant Standards-Based Shared System by 2015, and (2)
referenced revisions to policies and procedures in addition to operational guidance.
Volume I
Regional Governance & Regional Interoperable Migration Plan
Volume II
Regional Standard Operating Procedures & Texas Statewide
Interoperability Channel Plan
Executive Overview
“From terrorism to tornadoes, whatever happens, everyone is involved in truly a team effort,”
Steve McCraw, Director, Texas Homeland Security Conference, March 23, 2009.
Recognizing the need for an overarching emergency communications strategy to address
communications deficiencies that exist at the regional level, this guide provides the governance
and authority needed to decide on grant funding disbursement for regional interoperable
communications. This document includes, on a strategic level, equipment requirements, policies
and procedures that explain the equipment’s operational use, the training that must occur on the
new equipment, and the build-out plan of communications systems to achieve region-wide
interoperability and usage by all affected agencies on a daily basis.
This document establishes a Regional Interoperable Communications Plan (RICP) for the State
Planning Region 1 (Panhandle). The RICP is intended to document:
1) Regional Governance Structures (RGOV)
2) Regional Interoperable Migration Plans (RIMP)
3) Regional Standard Operating Procedures (RSOP)
This plan identifies who controls each communications resource, and what rules of use or
operational procedures exist for activation and deactivation of each resource.
The RICP is designed to align the state and regional communications interoperability plan,
objectives and goals to the National Emergency Communications Plan.
NECP
(National Emergency Communications Plan)
Goal 1
By 2010, 90 percent of all high-risk urban areas designated within the
Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) are able to demonstrate response-
level emergency communications within one hour for routine events
involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies.[Does not apply]
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 response-
level emergency communications within three hours, in the event of a
significant incident as outlined in national planning scenarios.
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
Page 5
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 2
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
Table of Contents
Approval & Authorization Page......................................................................................................i
1.
State of Affairs................................................................................................................6
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan Points of Contact .........................6
1.2.1 Regional Radio System Descriptions ..................................................................................11
Legacy County Dispatch Systems for Law Enforcement, Fire Service, and Emergency
Legacy Region-wide UHF Dispatch Systems for Emergency Medical Services...............11
Panhandle Regional Interoperable Communications System (PANCOM) .......................11
1.2.4 Transition to Standards-based Shared Emergency Communications Systems...................14
Migration Plan to P25 Compliant Standards-Based Shared Systems by 2015......21
3.3.1 Phased Installation Approach..............................................................................................22
Page 6
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 3
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
3.3.2 Risk Mitigation .....................................................................................................................22
Repeater Site and Console Site Reliability Risks..............................................................22
System Maintenance Risks ...............................................................................................23
Operability..........................................................................................................................23
3.3.4 Multi-jurisdictional / Multi-disciplinary Talkgroups / P25 Compliant Standards-Based Shared
4.
Regional Standard Operating Procedures & Texas Statewide Interoperability
Regional Standard Operating Procedure (RSOP).....................................................27
Dispatch Channels ............................................................................................................29
Panhandle Region Communications Policies and Procedures ..............................34
Dispatch Channel Patch Activation ...................................................................................36
Dispatch Channel Patch Limitations..................................................................................37
Dispatch Channel Patch Problem ID and Testing.............................................................37
Page 7
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 4
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
Executives & EOCs ...........................................................................................................40
Local Hospitals ..................................................................................................................41
One-Stop Telephone Number for DDC, PMACG, and PMOG..........................................42
Cellular Telephone ............................................................................................................48
4.12
Regional Training and Exercise Plans.......................................................................49
5.1
General ..........................................................................................................................51
5.2
Regional Interoperability (Mutual Aid) Channels......................................................51
Until 12/31/2012 ................................................................................................................51
Beginning 1/1/2013............................................................................................................52
Page 8
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 5
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
TSICP Definitions, Channel Naming, and Radio Programming Requirements .....53
Definitions ..........................................................................................................................53
Appendix
Appendix A:
High Level Timeline/Milestone/Cost Estimate .....................................................56
Regional ICS-217 Communication Resource Lists Until 12/31/2014...................62
Appendix E:
References ...........................................................................................................68
List of Tables
Table 15 VHF 150 MHz Narrowband Interoperability Channels ...................................................52
List of Figures
Figure 6 Typical On-Scene Communications organized by Functional Groups ..........................32
Figure 7 Typical On-Scene Communications organized by Geographical Divisions ...................33
Figure 8 MACS Requests for Resources or Operational Assistance..........................................39
Page 9
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 6
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
1. State of Affairs
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
The Regional Interoperable Communications Plan (RICP) is a strategic plan that:
•
Establishes a regional vision for the future state of local emergency communications.
•
Sets regional goals and priorities for addressing deficiencies in the region’s emergency
communications structure.
•
Provides recommendations and milestones for emergency response providers and
relevant government officials to improve their communications capabilities.
The RICP includes the Regional Governance Structures (RGOV), Regional Interoperable
Migration Plans (RIMP) and Regional Standard Operating Procedures (RSOP). The RICP
(inclusive of all three plans) should be brief and provide point of contact (POC) and direction for
additional information. Additional documents, such as Tactical Interoperable Communications
Plans or consultants proposals) can be added to the Appendix, and should be added to the Table
of Contents.
The following is the multidisciplinary team for establishing and completing initiatives and
milestones relative to the RICP scope or timeframe.
1.1 Regional Interoperable Communications Plan Points of
Contact
1.1.1
Regional Plan Coordinator
Primary:
Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
David Cann, Regional Emergency Communications Program Manager
415 West Eighth Avenue
Amarillo TX 79105
Office Phone: 806-372-3381
Cell Phone:
806-433-1895
24/7 Phone:
806-433-1895
E-Mail:
dcann@thrprpc.org
Alternate:
Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Reeves Easley-McPherson, Regional Emergency Communications Program
Specialist
415 West Eighth Avenue
Amarillo TX 79105
Office Phone: 806-372-3381
Cell Phone:
806-336-9876
24/7 Phone:
806-336-9876
E-Mail:
reasley@thrprpc.org
Page 10
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 7
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
1.1.2
Participating Jurisdictions and Agencies
Most Panhandle local government jurisdictions operate public safety agencies, or fund and
control local volunteer agencies. See Appendix B for a list of agencies affected by this plan.
The following is a list of city and county jurisdictions represented in the RICP:
Table 1 PRPC Participating Jurisdictions and Agencies
Jurisdiction / Agency
Point of Contact Office Telephone
Operate Radio
Communications
Armstrong County
County Judge
806-226-3221
X
Briscoe County
County Judge
806-823-2131
X
Carson County
County Judge
806-537-5395
X
Castro County
County Judge
806-647-4451
X
Childress County
County Judge
940-937-2221
X
Collingsworth County
County Judge
806-447-5408
X
Dallam County
County Judge
806-244-2450
X
Deaf Smith County
County Judge
806-363-7000
X
Donley County
County Judge
806-874-3625
X
Gray County
County Judge
806-669-8007
X
Hall County
County Judge
806-259-2511
X
Hansford County
County Judge
806-659-4100
X
Hartley County
County Judge
806-235-3442
X
Hemphill County
County Judge
806-323-5484
X
Hutchinson County
County Judge
806-878-4000
X
Lipscomb County
County Judge
806-862-4131
X
Moore County
County Judge
806-935-5588
X
Ochiltree County
County Judge
806-435-8075
X
Oldham County
County Judge
806-267-2607
X
Parmer County
County Judge
806-481-3383
X
Potter County
County Judge
806-379-2250
X
Randall County
County Judge
806-468-5500
X
Roberts County
County Judge
806-868-3721
X
Sherman County
County Judge
806-366-2021
X
Swisher County
County Judge
806-995-3504
X
Wheeler County
County Judge
806-826-5961
X
City of Adrian
City Manager
806-538-6223
X
Page 11
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 8
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
City of Amarillo
City Manager
806-378-3012
X
City of Bishop Hills
City Manager
806-352-6602
City of Booker
Mayor
806-658-4579
X
City of Borger
Mayor
806-273-0902
X
City of Bovina
City Manager
806-251-1116
X
City of Cactus
City Manager
806-966-5458
X
City of Canadian
City Manager
806-323-6473
X
City of Canyon
City Manager
806-655-5010
X
City of Channing
Mayor
806-235-3106
City of Childress
Mayor
940-937-8017
X
City of Clarendon
City Manager
806-874-8438
X
City of Claude
Mayor
806-226-3331
X
City of Dalhart
Mayor
806-244-5551
X
City of Darrouzett
Mayor
806-624-2441
X
City of Dimmitt
Mayor
806-647-3286
X
City of Dodson
Mayor
806-447-2575
City of Dumas
City Manager
806-948-4111
X
City of Estelline
City Manager
806-888-1212
X
City of Farwell
Mayor
806-481-3371
X
City of Follett
City Manager
806-653-2601
City of Friona
City Manager
806-250-2761
X
City of Fritch
Police Chief
806-857-4041
X
City of Groom
Mayor
806-248-7929
X
City of Gruver
City Manager
806-733-2424
X
City of Happy
City Manager
806-558-2121
X
City of Hart
Mayor
806-647-7144
X
City of Hedley
City Secretary
806-856-5241
X
City of Hereford
City Manager
806-363-7100
X
City of Higgins
City Manager
806-852-3131
X
City of Howardwick
City Secretary
806-874-2222
X
City of Kress
Mayor
806-684-2525
X
City of Lakeview
Mayor
806-867-2111
City of Lefors
Mayor
806-835-2200
Page 12
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 9
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
City of McLean
Dir. Of Public
Works
806-334-1186
X
City of Memphis
Mayor
806-259-3045
X
City of Miami
City Manager
806-868-4791
X
City of Mobeetie
Mayor
806-845-3581
X
City of Nazareth
Mayor
806-945-2285
X
City of Pampa
City Manager
806-669-5750
X
City of Panhandle
City Manager
806-537-3517
X
City of Perryton
Mayor
806-435-4014
X
City of Quitaque
City Manager
806-455-1456
X
City of Sanford
Mayor
806-865-3612
X
City of Shamrock
Mayor
806-256-3281
X
City of Silverton
City Manager
806-823-2125
X
City of Skellytown
City Secretary
806-848-2477
X
City of Spearman
City Manager
806-659-3654
X
City of Stinnett
Mayor
806-878-2422
X
City of Stratford
Mayor
806-396-2844
X
City of Sunray
City Manager
806-948-4111
X
City of Texhoma
Mayor
806-827-7669
X
City of Texline
City Manager
806-362-4849
X
City of Tulia
City Manager
806-995-3547
X
City of Turkey
Mayor
806-423-1289
X
City of Vega
Mayor
806-267-2144
X
City of Wellington
Mayor
806-447-2544
X
City of Wheeler
City Secretary
806-826-3222
X
City of White Deer
City Secretary
806-883-4191
X
Village of Lake Tanglewood
Mayor
806-622-8711
X
Village of Timbercreek Canyon
Fire Chief
806-622-3411
X
Village of Palisades
City Manager
806-679-8184
Generally, city and county jurisdictions in the Panhandle region look to PRPC for assistance
in communications planning.
Page 13
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 10
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
1.1.3
State Agencies Contact Information
Table 2 PRPC State Agencies POC Information
State Agency
POC Name
Emergency Contact Information
Texas Department of Public
Safety (RLO)
David Solis
806-468-1414 (o) 806-681-9744 (mobile)
Texas Department of Public
Safety (Communications)
Kelly Smith
806-472-2790 (o) 806-773-4770 (mobile)
Texas Forest Service
Shane Brown
806-651-3473 (o) 979-220-1540 (mobile)
Texas Parks & Wildlife
Doug Huggins
806-488-2227 X102 (Office)
Texas Department of
Transportation (Communications)
Paul Gilbert
512-506-5141 (o) 512-783-3035 (mobile)
Texas Department of State
Health Services
Kelly Northcott
806-783-6458 (o) 806-787-5929 (mobile)
1.1.4
Federal Agencies Contact Information
Table 3 PRPC Federal Agencies POC Information
Federal Agency
POC Name
Emergency Contact Information
USDI-National Park Service
Lake Meredith
Paul Jones
806-857-0302(o) 806-674-6608 (mobile)
USDOE Pantex Plant
Russell
Gollakner
806-477-4114(o) 303-564-1075 (mobile)
1.1.5
Non-Governmental Agencies Contact Information
Table 4 PRPC Federal Agencies POC Information
Federal Agency
POC Name
Emergency Contact Information
Amarillo Medical Service
Eric Lynn
806-358-7111(o) 806-584-1833 (mobile)
Page 14
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 11
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
1.2. Regional Communications Systems
1.2.1
Regional Radio System Descriptions
Table 5 PRPC Regional Radio Systems
System Name
Coverage Area
Disposition
Legacy City Dispatch Systems for Law
Enforcement, Fire Service, and EMS
57 Cities located in State
Planning Region 1
No changes; PANCOM to
provide Console Patching
Legacy County Dispatch Systems for
Law Enforcement, Fire Service, and
Emergency Management
26 counties comprising
State Planning Region 1
Retire; PANCOM
channels replace all
Legacy Region-wide UHF Dispatch
System for Emergency Medical
Services [ MED Channels]
26 counties comprising
State Planning Region 1
Retire; PANCOM
channels replace all
Panhandle Regional Interoperable
Communications System (PANCOM)
26 counties comprising
State Planning Region 1
PANCOM infrastructure
60% Complete
Legacy City Dispatch Systems for Law Enforcement, Fire Service, and EMS
The legacy city-owned public safety dispatch systems in the Panhandle are independent of
PANCOM, are separately licensed, and are managed by local agencies.
Without exception, local agency dispatch channel users also have access to PANCOM county-
level dispatch channels for interoperable communication purposes. Additionally, the PANCOM
program is providing new VoIP dispatch consoles at all PSAPs in the region, and those consoles
will provide console-patching capability for legacy city dispatch channels.
Legacy County Dispatch Systems for Law Enforcement, Fire Service, and Emergency
Management
The legacy county-owned public safety dispatch systems in the Panhandle are being retired as
PANCOM build-out proceeds. This is necessary due to re-use of legacy frequencies for PANCOM
system channels.
In general, legacy county-owned public safety dispatch channels are being replaced one-for-one
with PANCOM Infrastructure that provides improved coverage and reliability.
Legacy Region-wide UHF Dispatch Systems for Emergency Medical Services
This legacy private-sector owned public safety dispatch system in the Panhandle is being retired
as PANCOM build-out proceeds, and local EMS agencies are migrated from UHF MED channels
to VHF PANCOM channels.
Panhandle Regional Interoperable Communications System (PANCOM)
Panhandle Regional Interoperable Communication System (PANCOM) is a state-of-the-art
networked conventional VHF repeater system that will, upon completion, replace all 104 legacy
county-level dispatch repeater channels in the 26-county Panhandle region of Texas with P25
standards-based communications capability.
Based on The EF Johnson IP25 conventional architecture, the 130 PANCOM repeaters and 60
PANCOM dispatch consoles are being linked together with a secure private IP network that
enables several features usually associated with more expensive trunking systems:
Page 15
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 12
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
•
Simple routine console patching of law enforcement, fire service, EMS, and Emergency
Management communications in-county and with adjacent counties
•
Simple provision of fall-back dispatch console facilities at other PSAPS in the event a PSAP
or dispatch facility is made unusable through fire, flood, or storm
•
Limited wide-area communications through-out the Panhandle using VHF subscriber radios
for regional talk groups
•
Remote repeater health monitoring, alarms, firmware upgrades, and problem diagnosis from
a central network operations center (NOC) and from PANCOM contracted service shops
•
Simplified implementation of cross-band UHF and 700/800 Interoperability channels when
needed
•
Integration of legacy channels during PANCOM build-out and migration of agencies to
narrowband analog (then P25 digital) PANCOM channels
While fundamentally an operability system, PANCOM’s robust inter-site networking and console
patching features will provide routine mutual aid interoperability that is significantly superior to the
legacy infrastructure that promoted insular policies and procedures and resulted over the years in
“stove piping” of agency communications.
The PANCOM system plan incorporates three features that augment the fixed-site conventional
repeater infrastructure:
•
One PANCOM Site-on-Wheels (SOW) with trailer-mounted 3-channel PANCOM zone
subsystem and crank-up tower to provide for site loss due to tornado or wildfire (considered a
significant risk in the Panhandle region)
•
Two PANCOM Cross-Band Mobile Communications System trailers to provide satellite and
crossband repeater communications when requested by Incident Commanders. These MCS
trailers will provide all-band interoperability on site for large incidents requiring resources fro
distant agencies that may be equipped with UHF or 700/800 MHz band subscribers
equipment.
•
Provision for up to thirty-nine fixed-site 4-band Calling Channel Repeaters that provide
VCALL10, UCALL40, 7CALL50, and 8CALL90 calling channel functionality at all PANCOM
dispatch consoles and mobile command centers.
PANCOM system development began in late 2004 with a comprehensive Needs Analysis that
illustrated a compelling need for replacement and modernization of an aging legacy infrastructure
that was in serious need of replacement and rationalization.
Four years later, 31 of 42 three-channel Zone Subsystems have been installed at fixed sites, and
intersite networking and console installations are underway. Assuming continued funding from the
State Homeland Security Grant Progam, substantial completion of PANCOM (with all networking,
console, and migration efforts complete) is expected in late 2011-early 2012.
1.2.2 Regional Communications Assessment (CASM) Tool
The Communication Assets Survey and Mapping (CASM) tool provides the ability for
representatives of public safety agencies to collect, store, and visualize communication assets,
and analyze interoperability gaps.
Authorization to view data for a particular area or State is controlled by the Administrative
Manager (AM); each user must have a user name and password in order to login.
The Panhandle region’s communications resources are substantially all entered into CASM.
Page 16
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 13
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
Table 6 Regional CASM AM POC Information
System Name
POC Name
Phone
Area of
Responsibility
PANCOM
Reeves Easley-
McPherson
806-372-3381
reasley@theprpc.org
State Planning
Region 1
1.2.3 PANCOM System Locations
The PANCOM system infrastructure, approximately 60% complete, is sited at 102 separate tower
and PSAP sites, with microwave backhaul links arranged to provide separate in/out paths to each
site.
Figure 1 shows a high-level map of the system. The area shown is the 26-county Panhandle
region of Texas comprizing approximately 26, 000square miles:
Figure 1 PANCOM Site Map
Page 17
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 14
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
1.2.4
Transition to Standards-based Shared Emergency
Communications Systems
The PANCOM program plan for transitioning to standards-based shared emergency
communications systems by 2015 is envisioned as an eight-step process:
1. PANCOM Needs Analysis and System definition: See PRPC document Panhandle
Regional Interoperable Communication System (PANCOM) Communication Study and
Phase One Plan, published October 2004.
2. Procure and install PANCOM repeater site infrastructure at 42 sites. This step is 80%
complete.
3. Procure and install PANCOM dispatch console equipments at 25 PSAP sites. This step is
20% complete.
4. Procure and install PANCOM backhaul network equipments at 101 repeater, console,
and microwave-only sites. This step is 50% complete.
5. Migrate repeater sites and user agencies to Narrowband Analog emissions by December
31, 2010. This step is 35% complete.
6. Implement PANCOM wide-area features as backhaul network becomes available.
7. Migrate repeater sites and user agencies to P-25 Digital emissions by December 31,
2014.
8. Develop and implement PANCOM Sustainment Plan to provide for system management
and maintenance.
PRPC staff is confident that the Governor’s deadline for transition to standards-based shared
emergency communications systems of January 1, 2015 can be met.
1.2.5
Focus Group Sessions
Panhandle Regional Planning Commission’s annual Focus Group Session will take place on the
second Thursday of June each year during a specially-scheduled PREMAC Communications
Subcommittee meeting. The group will identify and/or re-evaluate:
• Areas and agencies lacking operability/interoperability.
o
Identify and plan to overcome gaps in regional operable/interoperable
communications, policies and training.
• Accomplishments and status of projects.
o
Progress along the Interoperability Continuum. Re-evaluate regional requirements
as technology evolves and circumstances dictate. Review communications related
SOPs created by the included agencies, to preclude conflicts or non-compliance
with current standards or initiatives.
• Initiatives and priorities for funding.
o
Prioritize and recommend projects for funding based on SCIP priorities and
initiatives, risk factors as defined in the Target Capabilities List (TCL), and the
CASM gap analysis.
This group will also review and update the “Implementation Timeline and Cost Report”. This
information will be submitted annually to Texas Association of Regional Councils (TARC) by July
1, to be integrated into the SCIP Initiatives and Funding Plan.
Page 18
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 15
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
1.2.6
SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum
The SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum is designed to assist emergency response agencies
and policy makers to plan and implement solutions for interoperable communications. This tool
identifies five critical success elements that must be addressed to achieve interoperability:
governance, standard operating procedures, technology, training and exercises, and usage.
Jurisdictions should use the Interoperability Continuum to track progress in strengthening
interoperable communications.
Figure 2 Interoperability Continuum
1.2.7
RICP Maintenance and Update
The RICP consists of two volumes:
Volume I
Regional Governance & Regional Interoperable Migration Plan
Volume II
Regional Standard Operating Procedures & the Texas Statewide
Interoperability Channel Plan
Revisions to Volume I will require executive approval from the Panhandle Regional Planning
Commission Board of Directors.
Revisions to Volume II will require approval from the Panhandle Regional Emergency
Management Advisory Committee, with authority delegated by the Panhandle Regional Planning
Commission Board of Directors. Revisions to Volume II will be posted online as required by
Texas Devision of Emergency Management.
The Panhandle Regional Emergency Management Advisory Committee (PREMAC) has the
responsibility to review this document at a meeting called, when necessary, by the RICP POC.
Page 19
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 16
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
Requests for modifications or additions to this document should be submitted to the RICP POC
for distribution to the PREMAC. Updates to this document can be recommended by any PRPC
member jurisdiction.
Jurisdictions participating in this plan will be formally notified within sixty (60) days of any
approved modifications or additions to this RICP.
1.2.8 RICP Ratification Process
After customizing the RICP template with regional policy and procedure information, formally
identifying the regional governance structure, and providing a high-level migration design to reach
a regional public safety P25 Compliant Standards-Based Shared System for voice
communications by 2015, the following ratification procedure will be employed:
1) The Texas Radio Coalition (TxRC) Technology Advisors and the Communications Area
Managers of the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) Bureau of Law Enforcement
Communications & Technology will collaborate with PRPC on the final review and
compliance of the RICP.
2) PRPC will develop a review and comment period for participating agencies, jurisdictions,
and counties.
3) The RICP documents approved at PRPC will be submitted to the State Coordinator for
Communications (SCC) at the Governor’s Division of Emergency Management.
4) RICPs must be compliant with the NECP, NIMS, National Response Framework, Target
Capabilities List, and the Texas Statewide Communications Interoperability Plan.
5) The governor has final authority over statewide communications interoperability.
Page 20
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 17
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
Texas Governor
Rick Perry
Texas Governor
Rick Perry
Assistant Director
Mike Simpson
Assistant Director
Mike Simpson
Deputy Director
Brad Rable
Deputy Director
Brad Rable
TxRC Executive
Committee
TxRC Executive
Committee
TxRC Working
Groups
TxRC Working
Groups
TxRC Steering
Committee
TxRC Steering
Committee
Homeland Security
& DPS Director
Steve McCraw
Homeland Security
& DPS Director
Steve McCraw
Texas Governor
Rick Perry
Texas Governor
Rick Perry
Assistant Director
Mike Simpson
Assistant Director
Mike Simpson
Deputy Director
Brad Rable
Deputy Director
Brad Rable
TxRC Executive
Committee
TxRC Executive
Committee
TxRC Working
Groups
TxRC Working
Groups
TxRC Steering
Committee
TxRC Steering
Committee
Homeland Security
& DPS Director
Steve McCraw
Homeland Security
& DPS Director
Steve McCraw
2. Governance (RGOV)
NECP Objectives:
•
To facilitate the development of effective governance groups and designated emergency
communications leadership roles;
•
To integrate strategic and tactical emergency communications planning efforts across all
levels of government;
•
To develop coordinated grant requirements that promote Federal participation and
coordination in communications planning processes, governance bodies, joint training
and exercises, and infrastructure sharing.
2.1 State Governing Body
Texas interoperable communications plans and governance is directed and approved by the
Texas Governor. The organizational chart on Figure 3 identifies support positions from the
Governor’s Office down to the regional level.
Figure 3 Texas Governance Organization Chart
Page 21
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 18
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
2.2 Regional Governance Authority
In accordance with the Texas Government Code 421 and the Texas Statewide Interoperable
Communications Plan (SCIP), the Panhandle region has adopted a regional governance structure
that provides supervision in the use of appropriated money, including money from relevant federal
homeland security grants, for the purposes of designing, implementing, and maintaining a
regional integrated public safety radio communications system that provides interoperability
between local, state and federal agencies and first responders.
2.2.1 Regional Governance Structure Representatives
The regional governing authority was developed under the authority of the Panhandle Regional
Planning Commission Board of Directors through the Panhandle Regional Emergency
Management Advisory Committee (PREMAC) established by PRPC Administrative Regulation
36.
The PREMAC is designated by the Board of Directors as the Regional Governing Body for
Regional Communications.
PREMAC is comprised of 30 members representing various disciplines and stakeholders in the
region’s 88 city and county jurisdictions:
Critical Infrastructure/Utilities
Emergency Management
Emergency Medical Services
Fire/Rescue
Information Technology (IT)
Investigations and Intelligence
Law Enforcement
Nongovernmental Organizations
(NGOs)
Public Health
Public Works
Public safety Communications
The PREMAC provides day-to-day oversight of regional emergency communications policy and
the PANCOM system development through its PREMAC Communications Subcommittee. This
subcommittee periodically seeks guidance and reports on subcommittee and PRPC staff actions
at regularly scheduled PREMAC meetings.
2.2.2 Regional Governing Body Responsibilities
The PREMAC will:
•
Maintain and update the RICP at regular intervals, or as critical updated information is
identified.
•
Disseminate updated plans to all participating agencies.
•
Establish training requirements in support of the RICP.
•
Promote interoperable communications capabilities through trained communications
personnel.
•
Initiate Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) and Agreements for interoperable
communications.
•
Promote regular interoperable equipment/solutions testing; assist agencies with test
evaluations, and dissemination of the results.
•
Schedule annual Focus Group Meetings.
2.2.3
Meeting Schedule
The PREMAC meets regularly at Panhandle Regional Planning Commission, generally on the
fourth Thursday of each month except December.
Page 22
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 19
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
3. Regional Interoperable Migration Plan (RIMP)
NECP Objectives:
•
Emerging technologies are integrated with current emergency communications
capabilities through standards implementation, research and development, and testing
and evaluation.
•
All levels of government drive long-term advancements in emergency communications
through integrated strategic planning procedures, appropriate resource allocations, and
public-private partnerships.
3.1 Regional System-of-Systems Design
Texas has adopted the “Project 25 Standard” as the technology solution and long-term
interoperability goal for voice public safety agency communications. The Texas SCIP directs the
foundation for statewide interoperable communications to be based on the SAFECOM/Office of
Emergency Communications (OEC) “System-of-Systems Approach for Interoperable
Communications”. The System of Systems definition is “A system of systems exists when a group
of independently operating systems—comprised of people, technology, and organizations—are
connected, enabling emergency responders to effectively support day-to-day operations, planned
events, or major incidents.”
Utilizing the System-of-System recommendations and in compliance with the Texas SCIP, each
region will develop high-level strategic plans to implement a regional interoperable
communications system which will become one of 24 regional systems forming the statewide
interoperable communications system.
Region 1 - Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Region 2 - South Plains Association of Governments
Region 3 - Nortex Regional Planning Commission
Region 4 - North Central Texas Council of Governments
Region 5 - Ark-Tex Council of Governments
Region 6 - East Texas Council of Governments
Region 7 - West Central Texas Council of Governments
Region 8 - Rio Grande Council of Governments
Region 9 - Permian Basin Regional Planning Commission
Region 10 - Concho Valley Council of Governments
Region 11 - Heart of Texas Council of Governments
Region 12 - Capital Area Council of Governments
Region 13 - Brazos Valley Council of Governments
Region 14 - Deep East Texas Council of Governments
Region 15 - South East Texas Regional Planning Commission
Region 16 - Houston-Galveston Area Council
Region 17 - Golden Crescent Regional Planning Commission
Region 18 - Alamo Area Council of Governments
Region 19 - South Texas Development Council
Region 20 - Coastal Bend Council of Governments
Region 21 - Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council
Region 22 - Texoma Council of Governments
Region 23 - Central Texas Council of Governments
Region 24 - Middle Rio Grande Development Council
Figure 4 Texas Regional Planning Districts/Councils of Governments
Page 23
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 20
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
With a system of systems approach, planners are able to consider how technology is evolving to
maintain system connections and overcome interoperability challenges. This approach allows for
greater consideration for backwards-compatibility, standard technical interfaces and migrating to
advanced technologies.
3.1.1
Critical Tasks
The communication capabilities (COMC) information provided in the following bullets are from the
“Target Capabilities List (TCL)”. Please see the following website for more information on the
TCL: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/training/tcl.pdf
•
ComC 1 – Develop communication plans, policies, procedures, and systems that support
required communications with all Federal, Regional, State, local, and tribal governments
and agencies as well as voluntary agencies.
•
ComC 1.4 – Design reliable, redundant, and robust communications systems for daily
operations capable of quickly reconstituting normal operations in the event of disruption
or destruction.
•
ComC 1.7.2 – Coordinate procurement and placement of technology communication
systems based on a gap analysis of requirements versus existing capabilities.
3.1.2
Preparedness Measures
•
Operable communications systems that are supported by redundancy and diversity, that
provide service across jurisdictions, and that meet everyday internal agency
requirements, are in place.
•
Communications SOPs that conform to NIMS are in place and are used in routine
multiple jurisdictional responses.
•
A multi-agency and multi-jurisdictional governance structure to improve communications
interoperability planning and coordination has been established.
•
Formal interoperable communications agreements have been established through the
governance structure.
3.2 Radio Infrastructure Overview
The Panhandle regional radio infrastructure is comprised of legacy non-networked dispatch radio
systems and the PANCOM regional P25-compliant system, as shown on Table 7:
Table 7 PRPC Regional Radio Systems
System Name
Coverage Area
Disposition
Legacy City Dispatch Systems for Law
Enforcement, Fire Service, and EMS
57 Cities located in State
Planning Region 1
No changes; PANCOM to
provide Console Patching
Legacy County Dispatch Systems for
Law Enforcement, Fire Service, and
Emergency Management
26 counties comprising
State Planning Region 1
Retire; PANCOM
channels replace all
Legacy Region-wide UHF Dispatch
System for Emergency Medical
Services [ MED Channels]
26 counties comprising
State Planning Region 1
Retire; PANCOM
channels replace all
Panhandle Regional Interoperable
Communications System (PANCOM)
26 counties comprising
State Planning Region 1
PANCOM infrastructure
60% Complete
Page 24
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 21
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
3.2.1 Legacy Non-P25 Compliant Systems
•
County-level Law Enforcement and Fire Service dispatch repeater systems in 26
counties. These equipments are being retired as PANCOM repeater sites are brought
on line.
•
City-level Law Enforcement and Fire Service dispatch repeater systems in City of
Amarillo, City of Borger, City of Canyon, City of Hereford, City of Dalhart, City of
Pampa, City of Childress, and 50 single-channel systems in small cities in the region.
These equipments will remain in service, supported by local jurisdictions.
Interoperability with adjacent-jurisdiction agencies will be provided by console-
patching on PANCOM consoles located at each PSAP.
•
NWTHS UHF MED channel system comprised of 14 sites in the Panhandle region.
These equipments are being retired as PANCOM repeater sites are brought on line.
3.2.3 PANCOM P25 Compliant System in Development
•
PANCOM County-level Law Enforcement, Fire Service, and EMS, and Emergency
Management dispatch repeater systems in 26 counties.
3.3 Migration Plan to P25 Compliant Standards-Based Shared
Systems by 2015
The PANCOM program plan for transitioning to standards-based shared emergency
communications systems is envisioned as an eight-step process:
1. Procure and install 42 county-level 3-channel repeater subsystems as stand-alone
sites without networking or wide-area features. Some counties with difficult terrain
have two subsystems. All subsystems are IP-based and network interfaces conform
to widely recognized TCP/IP protocols.
2. Install limited intersite networking (using native-ethernet microwave links) as required
to vote receivers in two-site counties, and to begin integration of PANCOM VoIP
consoles at county-level PSAP dispatch centers. Begin migration of agencies to
PANCOM narrowband analog channels and abandonment of legacy wideband
infrastructure.
3. Build out system-wide intersite networking and Network Operation Center) to enable
console patching with adjacent county zones and (perhaps more significant) to
enable remote repeater health monitoring, diagnosis, and reboots.
4. Complete PANCOM console installations; implement new processes and procedures
for mutual aid interoperability and limited wide-area talk groups.
5. Implement PANCOM Site-on-Wheels (SOW) and Mobile Communications System
Trailers for cross-band interoperability on large incidents of long duration.
6. Upon availability of a recurring-cost funding mechanism, develop a stable
organization for PANCOM network management, maintenance, and on-going system
improvement.
7. As P25 digital subscriber radios become the standard in the agencies over time,
implement system-wide migration to P25 digital, agency by agency.
Page 25
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 22
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
8. As adjacent COG IP networks become available, implement inter-COG talk groups
as deemed necessary at that time. As statewide IP network infrastructure becomes
available, integrate (limited) statewide talk groups as deemed necessary at that time.
Beginning in 2015-2018 time period, PRPC expects to incorporate provision for P25 Phase 2
TDMA equipments if needed to accommodate growth in communication channel loading and
anticipated demands for data interoperability by response agencies.
3.3.1
Phased Installation Approach
To minimize impact on existing operations and to extend funding on these large projects over
multiple years, a coordinated phase installation and integration approach is being taken, as
introduced above. At the inception of the project, PRPC divided the eight steps into four time
phases, since converted to three:
•
Phase One (2005-2009): Accomplish Steps 1 and 2
•
Phase Two and Three (2009-2010): Accomplish Steps 3 and 4.
PRPC determined that these Phases should be accomplished together to take advantage
of cost savings if consoles and networking are implemented together.
•
Phase Four (2010-2012): Accomplish Steps 5-8
Notice that the time phases overlap, in order to routinely complete planning, engineering, and
pilot project work prior to the bulk of phase expenditures.
3.3.2
Risk Mitigation
System Migration Risks
There are three notable risks to any radio communication system upgrade or migration:
1. The primary risk is interruption of operational traffic. This risk is being mitigated by
leaving all operations on legacy systems until the new PANCOM system is tested,
verified ready for commissioning, and accepted by using agencies.
2. The second significant risk is that the new system performance falls short of user
expectations. Since PRPC has promised significant improvements in system coverage
and performance, significant expenditure and effort is being invested in proper site
lightning protection, equipment housing, site standby power generators, failure-mode
analysis, and antenna coverage testing and tweaking.
3. The third notable risk is the introduction of new policies and procedures appropriate for
the new system, but different from the legacy system. This risk is being mitigated by
deliberately deferring policy and procedure changes until late in the system migration
process. Initial migration to the PANCOM system is being presented as “business as
usual” on the new better-performing repeater equipment.
Procedural changes to take advantage of PANCOM’s higher reliability and wide-area
features will be presented in a series of small changes over the three-year period 2010-
2012.
Repeater Site and Console Site Reliability Risks
There are three notable risks to reliable operation of PANCOM system sites:
1. The primary risk is interruption due to loss of utility AC power. This risk is being mitigated
by ensuring that all PANCOM county-level repeater sites are provided with on-site
propane-powered standby power generators, and that a plan is in place for generator re-
fueling for each identified standby power generator.
Page 26
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 23
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
2. The second significant risk is loss of PANCOM backhaul network connectivity. This risk is
mitigated in two ways:
•
Each Repeater Site Subsystem will operate in a fall-back mode wherein each
repeater continues to repeat received signals with the coding (CTCSS,
CDCSS, P25) present on the received signal
•
All PANCOM repeater and console sites are served by at least two
redundant backhaul network connections arranged along different physical
routes.
3. The third notable risk is the total loss of a PANCOM site due to tower icing, tornado, or
other catastrophic event. This risk is being mitigated in two ways:
•
PANCOM system planning provides for the construction and maintenance of
a Site-On-Wheels (SOW) trailer with repeater equipment enclosure, standby
power generator, and 110-ft antenna tower. The SOW is designed to
temporarily replace an entire PANCOM repeater site during re-construction
of a site after a loss.
•
PANCOM system planning provides for redundant dispatch console locations
for all PSAP/communications dispatchers. The redundant site will normally
be that PSAP where E911 telephone calls roll over in the case that E911
calls are not being answered at a PSAP.
•
A single PANCOM microwave-only repeater site, if lost, will not interrupt
backhaul since redundant physical paths are provided to all repeater and
console sites.
System Maintenance Risks
The PANCOM system is comprised of 130 VHF conventional repeaters, 53 VoIP dispatch
consoles, and 70 standby power generators located at 101 sites distributed over 26,000 square
miles of NW Texas.
Risk of equipment failure requiring maintenance is being mitigated by provision of maintenance
services by multiple contractors located in various locations around the Panhandle region
3.3.3 Operability / Interoperability
Wireless communications is fundamental for emergency responders to perform the most routine
and basic elements of their functions. Agencies must be operable, meaning they must have
sufficient wireless communications to meet their everyday internal and emergency
communication requirements before they place value on being interoperable, i.e., able to talk with
other agencies. The communications priorities for funding established by Texas first responders
in the SCIP are:
1.
Operability – providing radio coverage and user equipment where needed.
2.
Interoperability – providing mutual aid infrastructure and capability where needed.
3.
Build-out of regional P25 Compliant Standards-Based Shared Systems – upgrading
existing or building new P25 compliant shared systems.
The Panhandle region will identify and report agencies and areas lacking communications
operability and/or interoperability annually in their Focus Group Session.
Operability
In accord with the Needs Analysis developed in late 2004, the PANCOM system provides the
following repeater channels to satisfy operability requirements in the 26-county Panhandle region:
Page 27
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 24
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
•
County-level dispatch for Law Enforcement (Sheriff and Police Departments in small
cities that do not operate a separate dispatch channel for call-volume reasons)
•
County-level dispatch for Fire Service (VFD and City Departments in small cities that do
not operate a separate dispatch channel for call-volume reasons. In some low-population
Panhandle counties, local EMS agencies will be dispatched on this “Fire & EMS”
channel.
•
County-level dispatch for EMS (local volunteer agencies and city-operated systems in
small cities that do not operate a separate dispatch channel for call-volume reasons). A
separate EMS dispatch channel is being provided in those counties where call volume
approaches or exceeds 1000 calls per year.
•
County-level EOC/Incident repeater channel available when needed by Emergency
Managers or agency Incident Commanders. This channel is ideal for Command Net use
on local NIMS Type 3 incidents.
Excellent county-wide coverage (including in cities) is a key feature of these county-level repeater
channels. In some Panhandle counties, establishment of these repeater channels is allowing
direct channel-for-channel replacement of legacy wideband analog channels. In some low-
population counties, these channels represent a significant improvement in communications for
operability.
Interoperability
PANCOM planning addresses three distinct solutions for communications interoperability:
1. Mutual Aid Interoperability—On-Scene: The PANCOM program, through a variety of
methods, has exerted influence over agency subscriber radio programming templates
that incorporate the statewide mutual aid channels defined by the TSICP. Currently,
Panhandle region VHF radio templates include the eight wideband channels TXLaw
1,2,3; TXFire 1,2,3; TXAIR2, and TXMED1.
Currently, PRPC is facilitating migration to PANCOM narrowband channels in seven
of 26 counties. Once narrowband migration has been accomplished in all 26
counties, PRPC will facilitate a region-wide switch to TSICP Narrowband mutual aid
channels.
2. Mutual Aid Interoperability—Dispatch Infrastructure: PANCOM is providing the
capability and procedures to routinely patch city-county, county-county-county-federal
dispatch channels upon request by any Incident Commander. This capability is
considered a key to improvement of inter-jurisdiction coordination for large wildfires,
long-distance chases, etc. and is expected to simplify transition of NIMS Type 4
incidents to Type 3.
Additionally, dispatch channel privileges (and programming templates) for jurisdiction
agencies will include local dispatch channels and the dispatch channels for the eight
surrounding counties. This wide availability of dispatch communications over a wide
area is practical because PRPC holds FCC licences for all 130 PANCOM channels,
and because the PANCOM VoIP dispatch consoles provide enhanced intercom
communication between dispatchers.
3. Complex /Long-duration Incident Interoperability: Extraordinarily complex and long
duration incidents imply some potential for participation by statewide and interstate
resources who may arrive on scene equipped only with UHF or 700/800 band
subscriber radio equipment rather than the VHF equipment that is universal in the
Panhandle region.
PRPC planning for these incidents includes incident radio caches, utilization of the
National Radio Cache, and deployment of Mobile Communications System Trailers
for cross-band interoperability particularly on large incidents of long duration.
Page 28
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 25
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
3.3.4
Multi-jurisdictional / Multi-disciplinary Talkgroups / P25
Compliant Standards-Based Shared System
Jurisdictions in the Panhandle region achieve communications interoperability via a regional
channel plan shared by all users of the regional system. The interoperability channel plan was
developed and is managed by Panhandle Regional Planning Commission’s PANCOM program
The Panhandle region’s channel plan incorporates the requirements of the Texas Statewide
Interoperability Channel Plan. It also defines channels specific to the PANCOM system designed
to address the operational needs of users of this system. The plan further addresses the need to
control the size and complexity of subscriber-unit templates by creating interoperability channels
and making them common to all radios, minimizing the need to program agency-specific channels
into multiple agencies' radios.
New P25 statewide interoperability "ISSI" channels are designed to permit roaming among
disparate P25 systems via single-band (e.g., VHF, 700 MHz, 800 MHz, 900 MHz) or "multi-band"
subscriber units. This capability, currently in testing phase, is integral to the "system of systems"
statewide interoperability concept. At the point where statewide "ISSI"-type channels are
identified and named, the details will be captured in the TSICP and incorporated into ABC COG's
interoperability channel plan.
3.3.5
Implementation of Prioritized Projects
Regions prioritize projects for funding based on SCIP priorities and initiatives, risk factors as
defined in the TCL, and the CASM gap analysis. The Panhandle Region’s current top three high-
priority specific projects are:
Table 8 Prioritized Projects
Project Description
County
Primary
Agency
Operability /
Interoperability
Description
Complete PANCOM Phase One
Region
PRPC
Operability
PANCOM
Repeater Sites
Complete
PANCOM Phase Two & Three
Region
PRPC
Interoperability
Network &
Console Patching
PANCOM Phase Four
Region
PRPC
Interoperability
P25 & Wide-area
Features
3.3.6
Key Roles and Responsibilities
Regional Interoperability Coordinator (RIC):
Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
David Cann, Regional Emergency Communications Program Manager
415 West Eighth Avenue
Amarillo TX 79105
Office Phone: 806-372-3381
Cell Phone:
806-433-1895
24/7 Phone:
806-433-1895
E-Mail:
dcann@thrprpc.org
The RIC will oversee the migration of new and existing communications assets to a P25
Compliant Standards-Based Shared System for voice communications by 2015. The RIC will be
the point-of-contact for the Regional Interoperable Migration Plan and all projects associated with
the Plan.
Page 29
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 26
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
The RIC’s responsibilities are based on the SAFECOM recommendations for communications
systems. The three basic operations are:
1. PLAN – specifying the results to be achieved, determining the schedules, and estimating
the resources required;
2. ORGANIZE – defining roles and responsibilities; and
3. CONTROL – reconfirming expected performance, monitoring actions taken and results
achieved, addressing problems encountered and sharing information with all entities
involved.
The RIC may create a Project Management Team and assign specific tasks to others, such as
purchasing equipment. Both a “Project Implementation Plan” and a “Project Itemized Cost
Proposal” will be submitted to the Governor's Division of Emergency Management (GDEM)
Statewide Communications Coordinator for all projects. All projects in excess of $100,000.00 will
require the primary vendor to assign a Vendor Project Manager (VPM) to work with the RIC.
3.3.7
Implementation Timeline and Costs
“Capabilities-based Planning” accounts for uncertainties, by developing capabilities suitable for a
wide range of threats and hazards, when limited resources necessitate prioritization and choice
among preparedness efforts.”
The RIC will provide estimated costs for the:
•
Strategic build-out / upgrade of communications assets to a regional P25 Compliant
Standards-Based Shared System by 2015,
•
Routine operations, including backhaul, and maintenance,
•
Resources.
This information is presented in the “Implementation Timeline and Costs Report” spreadsheet,
Appendix A.
The RIC will update the “Implementation Timeline and Costs Report” annually for the Focus
Group Session. This report, along with the Focus Group Session Report will be submitted
annually to the TxRC and the State Communications Coordinator. Regional cost estimates will be
used to procure and disburse grant funding statewide.
Page 30
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 27
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
RICP VOLUME II
The Regional Interoperable Communications Plan (RICP) is divided into two volumes for ease of
revisions and approvals for (1) the distribution of funding and build-out and migration of regional
communications system(s) to P25 Compliant Standards-Based Shared System by 2015, and (2)
referenced revisions to policies and procedures in addition to operational guidance.
Volume I
Regional Governance & Regional Interoperable Migration Plan
Volume II
Regional Standard Operating Procedures & Texas Statewide
Interoperability Channel Plan
4. Regional Standard Operating Procedures & Texas
Statewide Interoperability Channel Plan
NECP Objectives:
•
Emergency responders employ common planning and operational protocols to effectively
use their resources and personnel.
•
Emergency responders have shared approaches to training and exercises, improved
technical expertise, and enhanced response capabilities.
•
The Region has integrated preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery capabilities
to communicate during significant events.
The Panhandle Regional Standard Operating Procedures contain information and the steps to
follow when responding to an emergency incident. Good plans and training transform policy into
well-defined steps that can be consistently performed by users to produce the desired outcome.
The Texas Statewide Interoperability Channel Plan describes conditions and guidelines for use of
state-licensed interoperability or mutual-aid radio channels.
Volume II Section 4 of the Panhandle Regional Interoperability Plan (RICP) will be available for
use by all emergency responders (local, state, federal, non-governmental) at www.
https://www.preparingtexas.org/index.aspx.
4.1 Regional Standard Operating Procedure (RSOP)
4.1.1 Introduction and Lead Agency
To remedy the inability to communicate among disciplines, the Panhandle Region’s public safety
agencies have worked cooperatively to develop regional interoperability solutions.
These solutions utilize Federal Communication Commission (FCC) designated and PANCOM
system-specific public safety interoperability radio channels and establish procedures for their
use. The interoperability radio channels are available as needed throughout the region. They are
intended to provide both communications operability and interoperability at any multi-agency
incident anywhere in the region.
According to the Statewide Communications Interoperability Plan (SCIP), "Each Regional SOP
will name a lead agency that will be responsible for the management, maintenance, and upgrade
of the SOP. The SOP’s will be revised when major changes are needed due to enhancements or
other changes in the communications environment." The lead agency for the Panhandle
Region’s RSOP is Panhandle Regional Planning Commission.
Page 31
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 28
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
4.1.2
Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this RSOP is to define the authority, roles, and procedures to be used by first
responders when operating on the Panhandle Region’s interoperability channels and/or activating
and using mobile communication assets. This RSOP provides general operational guidelines for
using calling channels, tactical interoperability channels, and region-wide interoperability patches.
This RSOP also recognizes a number of interoperable communications alternatives to the
Panhandle Region’s interoperability channels, which can provide back-up and redundant
communication capabilities during critical incidents.
The scope of this RSOP includes all traditional public safety agencies – law enforcement, fire
service, and EMS, plus certain other agencies when responding to emergency incidents:
•
Emergency Management
•
Public Works
•
Department of State Health Services
These agencies will work cooperatively to follow this RSOP during any multi-agency response.
Agencies outside this region wishing to participate may enter into a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with Panhandle Regional Planning Commission for use of the channels
and mobile assets, thereby agreeing to operate according to the procedures outlined in this
document.
4.1.3
Interoperability Channels
The term “Interoperability Channel” refers to three broad types of radio channels:
•
Mutual-aid Simplex channels used for unit-to-unit communications on scene and for unit-
to-dispatch communications on Calling Channels. The dispatcher may be located at a
dispatch center or at on on-scene Mobile Operations Unit. Statewide standard mutual aid
channels are defined in the Texas Statewide Interoperability Channel Plan (TSICP)
described in Section 5 below.
•
Regional Channel Patches used for wide-area communications beyond the range of a
single county-level dispatch system, typically joining dispatch channels in adjacent
counties. Channel patches are controlled by county-level dispatchers and can be
requested only by an Incident Commander or his/her designated Communication Unit
Leader (COML). Note that a law enforcement officer engaged in a multi-jurisdiction auto
chase is considered to be the Incident Commander and thus entitled to request channel
patches with adjacent-jurisdiction dispatch channel(s).
•
Regional Gateway Patches used to establish multi-county and/or inter-COG wide-area
channel patches for interoperable communication across a range of counties. Regional
Gateway Patches patches are controlled by county-level dispatchers (in PRPC counties)
and can be requested only by an Incident Commander or his/her designated
Communication Unit Leader (COML).
Appropriate use of Interoperability Channels is discussed in detail in following paragraphs.
4.1.4
National Incident Management System (NIMS)
All state agencies and local-government jurisdictions in the Texas Panhandle have adopted the
National Incident Management System (NIMS) and have agreed to manage large emergency
incidents using the Incident Command System (ICS) component of NIMS. Effective multi-agency
radio communications are essential to ICS, and it is important that emergency response agencies
include mutual-aid channels in their radios if they are to be effective resources on large-scale
incidents.
Page 32
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 29
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
4.1.5
Communications Procedures per NIMS
Dispatch Channels
Communications procedures on agency dispatch channels will remain largely un-changed. Minor
procedural additions to implement console patching with PANCOM consoles will be introduced by
PREMAC during calendar year 2010.
Interoperability Channels
On large or complex incidents, resources may respond from other counties in Texas, other states,
from federal agencies, and from private-sector or non-government organizations. In order that all
responders can effectively communicate on scene, it is important to standardize certain radio-use
procedures, in accordance with NIMS:
•
Communicate on assigned channel in accordance with the Incident Communications Plan. All
resources on an incident are encouraged to monitor the Command Net for situation
awareness and safety reasons, but are expected to transmit only on the assigned channel.
•
Call signs: After arrival and assignment on an incident, functional call signs are strongly
preferred over home-agency call signs. Examples on the "Cache Creek Fire": Cache Creek
IC, Cache Creek Ops, Task Force 6, Division A, Division B, etc. Incident call signs will
typically be assigned by the Incident Commander.
•
Calling procedure: Use "A, this is B" rather than "B to A". Experience nationally has shown
that a standardized calling procedure eliminates confusion when radio channels are busy.
•
Minimize radio traffic by refraining from non-essential communications. Generally,
communications should be limited to assignments or direction (orders), observations or status
reports, and coordination for effectiveness.
4.1.6
NIMS Incident Typing
Incident Command System, built on long experience in states where small local incidents often
transition into large complex or long-duration incidents, recognizes two communication structures
for “on scene” incident communications. The first structure (used for day-to-day dispatch
operations and small local incidents) easily transitions to a more robust communication structure
needed for large complex or long-duration incidents.
For clarity in describing the transitions from day-to-day to larger incidents, NIMs uses Incident
Typing:
•
Type 5:
An incident requiring a single agency resource to handle (e.g. one police unit or
one fire truck). Typically of short duration; managed by agency Standard
Operating Procedure.
•
Type 4:
An incident requiring the resources of one jurisdiction and its normal mutual aid
resources. Typically one shift in duration; managed by local leadership by agency
Standard Operating Procedure.
•
Type 3:
A complex or long-duration incident that exceeds the capability of local resources
and normal mutual aid, thus requiring “outside” resources and more detailed
supervision. Mutual aid resources normally report to Staging. May last for several
shifts or perhaps up to a week. Can be managed by local-resource management
team using a major incident organization and an Incident Communications Plan.
•
Type 2:
A very complex or long-duration incident that exceeds the capability of a local-
resource management team. In Texas, managed by a state or federal Type 2
management team in accordance with a delegation from the local jurisdiction.
Incident Communication Plan may include incident repeaters, microwave links,
etc., that are established for the duration of the incident.
Page 33
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 30
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
•
Type 1:
An extremely complex or long-duration incident that exceeds the capability of a
state or federal Type 2 management team. Managed by a state or federal Type 1
management team in accordance with a delegation from the Governor and/or
local jurisdiction. Incident Communication Plan may include incident repeaters,
microwave links, etc., that are established for the duration of the incident.
The transition from a simple dispatch-channel communications structure to a more complex
incident communication plan is a clearly defined responsibility of the Incident Commander.
4.1.7
Appropriate Use of Interoperability Channels
Use of interoperability channels shall be limited to their designated purpose of coordination
between emergency response agencies, dispatchers, and resources in the field. Such
coordination may occur during en-route travel, during exercises, or on-scene.
The interoperability channels are not to be used for routine dispatch operations but may be used
by dispatchers for communications with personnel in the field, in accordance with local and
regional policies and procedures. Tactical interoperability channels may be used for day-to-day
emergency operations in the absence of higher priority events.
Use of interoperability channels shall be prioritized as follows:
1. Emergency or urgent operation involving imminent danger to life or property.
2. Disaster or extreme emergency operation requiring extensive interoperability and inter-
agency communications.
3. Special event, generally of a pre-planned nature.
4. Joint training exercises.
5. Inter-agency and en-route communications in accordance with local and regional policies
and procedures.
6. Day-to-day tactical communications on scene.
Emergency response agencies in the Panhandle are equipped to coordinate and communicate by
radio using the TSICP "mutual-aid" channels.
4.2 Communications Structure
The incident communications structure will depend on the size, duration, and complexity of
the incident, as described in the following paragraphs.
4.2.1
Routine NIMS Type 5 and 4 Incidents
The Communications Structure for routine Type 5/4 day-to-day incident responses (and thus
communications procedures) will remain unchanged from historical usage. That is:
•
Most communications will occur on the agency dispatch channel
•
Nearby “local” mutual aid resources will be ordered from the agency dispatcher, and will
communicate on arrival on the requesting agency’s dispatch channel
•
Tactical communications will remain on the dispatch channel
•
At the Incident Commander’s discretion, tactical communications may be moved to a
separate non-dispatch channel. The Texas Interoperability Channel Plan allows use of
Interoperability channels as day-to-day tactical channels.
The Incident Commander is solely responsible for defining the incident communications plan.
Page 34
State Planning Region 1 – Panhandle Regional Planning Commission
Regional Interoperable Communications Plan
February 2010
Page 31
PUBLIC SAFETY SENSITIVE
4.2.2
NIMS Type 3, Type 2, and Type 1 Incidents
Figure 5 is an example of an expanded organization chart for Incident Management at a
major incident. It includes the Communications Unit Leader (COML) position in the Logistics
section. A full description of the duties and responsibilities of the Communicati