Interoperability: Lets Talk

1
Interoperability Lets Talk
2
in-ter-op-er-a-bi-li-ty n

• ability of a system to use the parts or
  equipment of another system
• -Merriam-Webster Dictionary

3
in-ter-op-er-a-bi-li-ty n

• ability of a system to use the parts or
  equipment of another system
• -Merriam-Webster Dictionary
• IN OTHER WORDS
• links, not barriers

4
Interoperability Montana

• A Made in Montana project
• A volunteer-driven project
• A public safety project
• A life-saving project

5
Interoperability Public Safety

• A Federal Priority
• (Homeland Security, Public Safety)

6
Interoperability Public Safety

• A Federal Priority
• (Homeland Security, Public Safety)
• A State Priority
• (Gov. Schweitzer, Natl Governors Assoc.)

7
Interoperability Public Safety

• No person shall lose his or her life because
  public safety officials can not communicate.
• -MT Statewide Communications Interoperability
  Plan

8
Interoperability Public Safety

• Better local radio coverage

9
Interoperability Public Safety

• Better local radio coverage
• Ability to talk across county lines

10
Interoperability Public Safety

• Better local radio coverage
• Ability to talk across county lines
• Assist mutual aid among jurisdictions

11
Interoperability Public Safety

• Better local radio coverage
• Ability to talk across county lines
• Assist mutual aid among jurisdictions
• Connected and compatible

12
How IM Began

• KEY FACTORS
• 9-11
• Homeland Security Act
• Natl Emergency Communications Plan
• MT Homeland Security Plan
• Statewide Interoperability Executive Council
  (2004)

13
How IM Began

• THE KEY PLAYERS
• Dept. of Administration
• Information Technology Services Div.
• Public Safety Services Bureau
• Disaster Emergency Services
• Statewide Interoperability Executive Council

14
How IM Began(The Montana Interlocal Cooperation
Act)

• 7-11-104 (MCA)
• Authorization to create interlocal agreements --
  One or more public agencies may contract with
  any one or more other public agencies to perform
  any administrative service, activity, or
  undertaking or to participate in the provision or
  maintenance of any public infrastructure
  facility, project, or service

15
The Consortium Concept Interlocal
Agreements Among Counties and Sovereign Indian
Nations
16
(No Transcript)
17
How IM Began2005 Statewide organization
created(under MT Interlocal Cooperation Act)
18
Statewide Interoperability A Timeline

• 2004 Statewide Interoperability
  Executive Council
• 2005 Interoperability Montana
• 2007 Statewide Communications
  Interoperability Plan (SCIP)
• 2009 SCIP review update

19
SCIP(Statewide Communications Interoperability
Plan)

• MISSION
• Create a Montana-wide,
• State of the Art,
• Public Safety Voice and Data
• Interoperable Communications System
• By 2014

20
SCIP(Statewide Communications Interoperability
Plan)

• VISION
• A seamless communications system
• that links
• Public Safety Disciplines
• Communities and Counties
• Sovereign Indian Nations
• State and Federal Agencies
• Other States Canada
• Private Entities

21
SCIP(Statewide Communications Interoperability
Plan)

• GOALS
• Provide Role for Stakeholders and Users
• in Management and Implementation
• Formalize Equality in Decision-making
• (IMPD Governance)

22
SCIP(Statewide Communications Interoperability
Plan)

• WORK ALREADY UNDERWAY
• Upgrading radio transmission sites (reliability)
• Trunked radio coverage (larger volume)
• Connectivity (between individual systems)
• Backbone Infrastructure (to allow for
  expansion)

23
SCIP(Statewide Communications Interoperability
Plan)

• FUTURE POSSIBILITIES
• Remote Sensing (Border Patrol, et al)
• Data Transmission (not just voice)
• Mobile Data (computers in vehicles)
• New Applications (as they develop)

24
SCIP(Statewide Communications Interoperability
Plan)

• No person shall lose his or her life because
  public safety officials can not communicate.

25
THE IM OBJECTIVE

• Develop
• (a) radio communications system
• based on federal and state standards
• in which federal, state and local
• public safety and
• emergency management representatives
• can operate autonomously
• and transition seamlessly
• to communicate effectively
• during emergencies and disasters.

26
THE IM OBJECTIVE

• Develop
• (a) radio communications system
• based on federal and state standards
• in which federal, state and local
• public safety and
• emergency management representatives
• can operate autonomously
• and transition seamlessly
• to communicate effectively
• during emergencies and disasters.

27
THE IM OBJECTIVE

• Develop
• (a) radio communications system
• based on federal and state standards
• in which federal, state and local
• public safety and
• emergency management representatives
• can operate autonomously
• and transition seamlessly
• to communicate effectively
• during emergencies and disasters.

28
THE IM OBJECTIVE

• Develop
• (a) radio communications system
• based on federal and state standards
• in which federal, state and local
• public safety and
• emergency management representatives
• can operate autonomously
• and transition seamlessly
• to communicate effectively
• during emergencies and disasters.

29
THE IM OBJECTIVE

• Develop
• (a) radio communications system
• based on federal and state standards
• in which federal, state and local
• public safety and
• emergency management representatives
• can operate autonomously
• and transition seamlessly
• to communicate effectively
• during emergencies and disasters.

30
THE IM OBJECTIVE

• Develop
• (a) radio communications system
• based on federal and state standards
• in which federal, state and local
• public safety and
• emergency management representatives
• can operate autonomously
• and transition seamlessly
• to communicate effectively
• during emergencies and disasters.

31
THE IM OBJECTIVE

• Develop
• (a) radio communications system
• based on federal and state standards
• in which federal, state and local
• public safety and
• emergency management representatives
• can operate autonomously
• and transition seamlessly
• to communicate effectively
• during emergencies and disasters.

32
THE IM OBJECTIVE

• Develop
• (a) radio communications system
• based on federal and state standards
• in which federal, state and local
• public safety and
• emergency management representatives
• can operate autonomously
• and transition seamlessly
• to communicate effectively
• during emergencies and disasters.

33
FEDERAL AND STATE STANDARDS (Statewide
Communications Interoperability Plan)

• Wide area system for use by public safety
  responders
• APCO Project 25 (P25) radio technology
• Backwards compatible
• (allowing both trunked and
  digital/analog)
• Narrowband in VHF (old TV) range
• Protected high-capacity digital
• wireless backbone
• Assoc. of Public Safety Communications Officials
  International

34
COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY(Statewide
Communications Interoperability Plan)

• Better coverage in local areas
• Seamless roaming across boundaries
• Shared use of frequencies
• Better communications with older radios
• (Backwards Compatibility)
• Enhanced Responder Safety
• Enhanced Public Safety

35
EMERGENCIES AND DISASTERS(Statewide
Communications Interoperability Plan)
36
DEMONSTRATING INTEROPERABILITY

• THE CONCEPT
• Digital Radio/Trunking
• Deployed System, County-wide
• All Responders Have Radios

37
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 1--Lewis and Clark County
• (operational in 2005)

38
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 1--Lewis and Clark County
• (operational in 2005)
• Advantages
• Local Support and Funding
• Limited Service Area

39
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 2--Northern Tier Project
• (moving toward completion)

40
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 2--Northern Tier Project
• (moving toward completion)
• WHY IT WAS CHOSEN
• International Border
• Major Transportation Lines (Highway, Rail)
• Multiple Sovereign Indian Nations

41
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 2--Northern Tier Project
• (moving toward completion)
• CHALLENGES
• Began as Glacier County-sponsored Project

42
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 2--Northern Tier Project
• (moving toward completion)
• CHALLENGES
• Began as Glacier County-sponsored Project
• Design Changes (N. Tier Consortium requests)

43
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 2--Northern Tier Project
• (moving toward completion)
• CHALLENGES
• Began as Glacier County-sponsored Project
• Design Changes (N. Tier Consortium requests)
• Project Transferred to MT Military Affairs (2006)

44
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 2--Northern Tier Project
• (moving toward completion)
• CHALLENGES
• Began as Glacier County-sponsored Project
• Design Changes (N. Tier Consortium requests)
• Project Transferred to MT Military Affairs (2006)
• Project Transferred to IM (2008)

45
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 2--Northern Tier Project
• (moving toward completion)
• CHALLENGES
• Began as Glacier County-sponsored Project
• Design Changes (N. Tier Consortium requests)
• Project Transferred to MT Military Affairs (2006)
• Project Transferred to IM (2008)
• Contract Change Orders, Weather Delays

46
Concept Demonstration Projects

• CDP 2--Northern Tier Project
• (moving toward completion)
• CHALLENGES
• Began as Glacier County-sponsored Project
• Design Changes (N. Tier Consortium requests)
• Project Transferred to MT Military Affairs (2006)
• Project Transferred to IM (2008)
• Contract Change Orders, Weather Delays
• Delayed Acceptance of Completed System

47
Original Northern Tier Backbone(Before Design
Changes)
48
Northern Tier Lewis Clark System Coverage
(once all accepted and operational)
Light blue 95 mobile coverage Dark blue
Overlapping coverage
49
The Northern Tier Whats Left?

• Fleet Mapping
• (well underway)
• Radio upgrades (if necessary)
• System testing (underway)
• Training Users
• System Acceptance

The Last StepUsing It!
50
What Else is Happening?

• Completing the connectivity loop in E. MT
• Eastern Montana master controller
• Gallatin County sites with Northern Tier
• Helena-Butte-Bozeman-Roundup sites NEPA-approved
  for construction
• Beaverhead Madison Co. sites awarded

51
What Else is Happening?

• Standard Operating Procedure training
• (Helena and Billings in late July)
• Fleet mapping for Central MT Consortium (Great
  Falls early August)
• Identifying public-private partnerships

52
The Statewide Plan

• Connected backbone loop to serve all
• 9 consortia, state federal partners

53
(No Transcript)
54
Who Can Benefit?

• Local disciplines (Police, Fire, EMS, etc.)
• State agencies (Justice, Transportation,
• Natural Resources, National Guard)
• Federal agencies (FBI, Air Force, Interior,
  Border Patrol, Customs, Forest Service)

55
Connected and Compatible

• With Canadian provinces
• With neighboring states
• South Dakota, Wyoming, Idaho
• (All using same radio system)

56
Funding Interoperability

• Project 35 Funded
• 23 Funding Sources
• 100 Million Needed to Complete Project Statewide

57
Funding Interoperability(Sources of Funds
Managed by IM)

• Homeland Security Grants (2005-2009)
• Public Safety Interoperable Communications Grant
  (2007)
• State Legislature (2007-09)
• National Guard Grant
• IECGP Grant

58
Funding Interoperability(Non-IM Managed Sources)

• Counties
• Sovereign Indian Nations
• State Agencies
• (MDOT, Natl Guard, PSSB, Highway Patrol,
  Corrections)
• Federal Agencies
• (Air Force, FBI, BLM,
• COPS grants)
• Private Sector
• Contributions

59
State Support A Challenge(2009 MT Legislature)

• 1 million for FY2010-11
• (1 million less than requested)
• Puts Southeast Montana work at risk

60
Federal Agency SupportU.S. Government Funds
(2004-08) 42.7 M

• Homeland Security 30 Million
• PSIC Grant 6.3 Million
• COPS Grants 6.2 Million

61
How Congress Can Help(FY 2010 Appropriation
Request)

• WHERE Southeast Montana
• WHAT Connecting SE counties to loop
• HOW MUCH 3.19 Million

62
How Congress Can Help(FY 2010 Appropriation
Request)

• WHATS UNDERWAY
• Completing the Loop
• Counties Served
• Richland, Dawson, Wibaux, Prairie, Custer
• Funded by
• Homeland Security Grants
• (2008, 2009)

63
How Congress Can Help(FY 2010 Appropriation
Request)
WHATS NEXT Reaching the Southeast
Corner (Gray lines)

• Counties Served Fallon, Carter, Custer,
• Powder River, Rosebud
• Northern Cheyenne Reservation
• Eastern Crow Reservation

64
How Congress Can Help(FY 2010 Appropriation
Request)
Helping Southeast Montana Talk

• New network connectivity sites
• New radios
• System support and training

65
How Congress Can Help(FY 2010 Appropriation
Request)
Building Capacity to Support

• Homeland Security
• Drug Interdiction
• Day-to-day Emergency Communications

66
How Congress Can Help(FY 2010 Appropriation
Request)
Solving Problems in Rural Montana

• Outdated (10-30 year-old) Radio Fleets
• Poor Radio Coverage
• Unreliable Costly Systems

67
How Congress Can Help(FY 2010 Appropriation
Request)
Why Southeast Montana? (And not Billings area?)

• Big Sky 11 Consortium not ready
• (addressing compatibility with Billings)
• Eastern Tier ready now

68
Whats in it for me?

• I like the interoperability. I like being able
  to talk to who I need, when I need. And I like to
  bring in my neighbors, even on small incidents.

LEO DUTTON Lewis Clark County Sheriff
69
Whats on the Horizon?
70
Whats on the Horizon?

• CONTINUING THE BUILD-OUT
• SUSTAINING THE
• IM SYSTEM

71
When Will IM Reach Me?

• SCIP envisions complete system by 2014

• VARIABLES
• Federal funding (grants, etc.)
• State agency contributions
• MT Legislature appropriations

72
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• KEY ELEMENTS

73
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• KEY ELEMENTS
• Federal, state, local participation

74
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• KEY ELEMENTS
• Federal, state, local participation
• Fair affordable fee structures

75
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• KEY ELEMENTS
• Federal, state, local participation
• Fair affordable fee structures
• Support from non-users

76
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• GOVERNMENT SUPPORT
• Federal grants appropriations

77
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• GOVERNMENT SUPPORT
• Federal grants appropriations
• State Legislature appropriations

78
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• GOVERNMENT SUPPORT
• Federal grants appropriations
• State Legislature appropriations
• State agency budget funds

79
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• SUPPORT FROM USERS
• Local member contributions
• (based on size and join-up date)

80
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• SUPPORT FROM USERS
• Local member contributions
• (based on size and join-up date)
• State member contributions

81
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• NEW REVENUE SOURCES
• (May Require Legislation)

82
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• NEW REVENUE SOURCES
• (May Require Legislation)
• Non-resident visitors?

83
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• NEW REVENUE SOURCES
• (May Require Legislation)
• Non-resident visitors?
• Motorists?

84
Sustaining the System How?
Sustainability Plan drafted in January 2009

• NEW REVENUE SOURCES
• (May Require Legislation)
• Non-resident visitors?
• Motorists?
• Traffic violators?

85
IM Our Responsibilities
86
IM Our Responsibilities

• Finish Northern Tier

87
IM Our Responsibilities

• Finish Northern Tier
• Prove it works

88
IM Our Responsibilities

• Finish Northern Tier
• Prove it works
• Increase number of users

89
IM Our Responsibilities

• Finish Northern Tier
• Prove it works
• Increase number of users
• Build in more areas

90
IM Our Responsibilities

• Finish Northern Tier
• Prove it works
• Increase number of users
• Build in more areas
• Increase trust with local jurisdictions

91
IM Our Responsibilities

• Finish Northern Tier
• Prove it works
• Increase number of users
• Build in more areas
• Increase trust with local jurisdictions
• Better two-way dialogue

92
Uncertainties

• Economy

93
Uncertainties

• Economy
• Politics

94
Uncertainties

• Economy
• Politics
• IMPD SIEC Leaders

95
Uncertainties

• Economy
• Politics
• IMPD SIEC Leaders
• The Feds

96
Uncertainties

• Economy
• Politics
• IMPD SIEC Leaders
• The Feds
• Results

97
Statewide Interoperability Is (The Bottom Line)

• A federal priority (Homeland Security,
• Public Safety)

98
Statewide Interoperability Is (The Bottom Line)

• A federal priority (Homeland Security,
• Public Safety)
• A state priority (Gov.Schweitzer,
• Natl Governors Assoc.)

99
Statewide Interoperability Is (The Bottom Line)

• A federal priority (Homeland Security,
• Public Safety)
• A state priority (Gov.Schweitzer,
• Natl Governors Assoc.)
• In progress

100
Statewide Interoperability Is(The Bottom Line)

• A federal priority (Homeland Security,
• Public Safety)
• A state priority (Gov.Schweitzer,
• Natl Governors Assoc.)
• In progress
• Achievable

101
Interoperability Montana Will

• Protect Public Safety Responders

102
Interoperability Montana Will

• Protect Public Safety Responders
• Protect the Public

103
Interoperability Montana Will

• Protect Public Safety Responders
• Protect the Public
• Save Lives

104
Interoperability Montana Will

• Protect Public Safety Responders
• Protect the Public
• Save Lives
• Achieve State and Federal Goals

105
Now Its Your Turn