Communications interoperability and emergency response after Hurricane Katrina and September 11

Emergency Management and Communications Interoperability

In an emergency situation, it is vitally important to have adequate communication software in place to ensure the speedy response of emergency personnel. Indeed, ideally, such systems would be free from failure and allow rescue workers to save the maximum amount of lives. The reality is however rather less than ideal, as demonstrated by the devastation of September 11, 2001 and Hurricane Katrina. In order to remedy the situation, interoperability issues need to be addressed.

The other side of the coin is however, would such attention adversely affect local jurisdictions in terms of cost and time investments? Conversely, the research might also ask - how much importance in terms of funding can be placed upon a human life? The dichotomy created by these two questions will be addressed in this research. In order to do so, the specific concepts attached to interoperability, emergency management, and funding will be considered. Furthermore, specific emergency management issues related to 911 calls, September 11, and the events surrounding Hurricane Katrina will be used to contextualize the interoperability issue.

At the basis of the research is the question whether the implementation of the expensive 800 mHz band as a requirement has truly improved rescue operations to such an extent that it justifies the cost involved.

a. What is Emergency Management

The current concept of emergency management refers to the readiness of a nation in case of any emergency situation. Such situations may occur on either a large or small scale. Terrorist attacks, natural disasters, and accidents could broadly characterize emergencies that might befall a nation. In the United States, the 911 emergency call network is available to the public if they need assistance in an emergency.

Large organizations such as the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA) and, the national military, the national police force and firefighters can make themselves available to handle large-scale emergencies. According to NEMA's EM Website (2009), the history of Emergency Management can be traced back to the origins of the American nation itself. During the 19th century, local efforts were implemented to help deal with threats such as fire and disease in the growing cities and towns of the country.

These resources were not however sufficient to handle a fire that swept through Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Local resources were inadequate by far to handle response and recovery. This led to the first disaster relief legislation. This was also the first stages of federal assistance during disasters.

Civil defense in terms of emergency management became an issue during the early years of the 20th century. During these years, the industrial revolution and the concomitant technological developments resulted in weapons of increasingly destructive power. Situations such as chemical warfare and civilian bombing in Europe also brought home to the U.S. government the importance of protection against terrorist power. Hence, President Roosevelt established the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) during 1939, when the threat of war was imminent.

When World War II ended, federal emergency management increased dramatically in response to new threats such as nuclear attack and the Cold War. President Truman's Federal Civil Defense Administration, established during the late 1940s, was responsible for handling civil defense for the country and its citizens.

The 1960s saw a renewed focus upon natural disaster relief and recovery. At the time, duties pertaining to such services were separate from civil defense, and handled by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). As part of HUD, the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration was created to specifically handle disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes. As these efforts grew, so did the agencies involved in relief practices. An increasing amount of different agencies became involved in emergency efforts, which considerably fragmented the industry. According to NEMA (2009), as many as 100 agencies were involved in such efforts and competing for control of particular disasters.

President Jimmy Carter addressed this problem during 1979, when FEMA was established to coordinate all federal disaster relief efforts. Agencies such as the Federal Insurance Administration, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, and several others were absorbed by FEMA. For the duration of the Cold War, FEMA's main focus was civil defense. As the war and its associated threats however recede, the focus of this protection moved back towards natural disasters.

During Hurricane Andrew, however, the Federal Emergency Management Association proved to fall far short of their protection and response requirements in Miami. Wide-scale public outcry resulted in a major overhaul of the Association from 1992. This in turn resulted in the agency becoming one of the most successful in federal history during the last years of the 20th century.

Since the terrorist attacks during September 2001, the Association has fallen back into disfavor once again. After these attacks, President Bush established the Department of Homeland Security in order to coordinate a variety of federal efforts include law enforcement, disaster preparedness and recovery, as well as more military duties such as border protection and civil defense. During 2003, FEMA was made part of the DHS Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate.

The National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) was established during 1974, in order to unite state directors of emergency services for the first time. As such, NEMA acts as the consolidation agency for all emergency management organizations within the United States. In 1990 it also became an affiliate organization of the Council of State Governments (CSG).

Emergencies such as the 9/11 attacks and Hurricane Katrina revealed significant shortcomings in both these Agencies. Many blame the government's budget during the office of President Bush. Significant cuts have been made to the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program, making it difficult to function effectively when major disasters strike. Many critics believe that the basic reason for NEMA's and FEMA's failure during these emergencies is the lack of interoperability and adequate communication systems.

b. Interoperability

Paul Miller (2000) defines interoperability in very broad terms. He notes that the term refers to the action of actively engaging in the process of management for systems, procedures and culture in order to maximize opportunities for exchange and re-use of information, whether internally or externally. At its basis, the term therefore refers to the effective dissemination and sharing of information.

Miller identifies various forms of interoperability. The first of these is Technical Interoperability, which refers to the continued development of communication. Individual standards are to benefit the community and ensure the convergence of communication systems. Most applicable to emergency management is probably political/human interoperability and inter-community interoperability.

According to Miller (2000), political or human interoperability concerns the availability and dissemination of resources for certain purposes. In the case of disaster management, the organizations concerned, their staff, and the skills required to move resources are vital in order to make a success of rescue operations. Here communication technology is of vital importance, as will be seen later. It is important to implement adequate communication systems in order to ensure that rescue agencies and teams are dispatched within an acceptable time limit.

Inter-community interoperability refers to the blurring lines between institutions and disciplines. When large-scale emergency operations are for example required, various agencies are involved, including the military and firefighting professionals. It is therefore important that they be able to communicate adequately to ensure a high quality of integrated services. In this type of interoperability, the inter-disciplinary paradigm is also of importance. With multiple agencies that are involved in emergency operations, common solutions and partnerships should be in place before the occurrence of large-scale disasters to ensure the readiness of professionals to handle these. Such interoperability should also include the federal government itself in order to ensure effectiveness and professionalism.

II. LESSONS LEARNED

The 21st century holds several lessons for professional agencies in terms of disaster management. The two most significant of these is the 9/11 tragedy during 2001 and Hurricane Katrina during 2005. In general and on a smaller scale, it is also useful to consider the effectiveness of the 911 emergency hotline, and the subsequent dispatch of emergency services to individuals. All three these areas entail significant shortcomings in communication technologies, which have proved costly in terms of human suffering and lives.

In order to ensure a better future in terms of emergency response, it is therefore important to carefully analyze and consider the lessons that can be learned from disasters and tragedies such as these.

a. September 11, 2001

The terrorist attacks during the second half of 2001 were probably the worst in American history, and it affected emotions on a national scale. The tragedy occurred upon a multi-dimensional scale. In addition to the inevitable and immediate deaths, some mortalities could have been prevented had proper communications systems been in place.

i. Communication Failure

A report released by Adrianne Marsh (2005) reveals how inadequate the communication systems were at the time. According to the report, there were at least 15 hours of chaos and confusion following the attack. Congressman Bart Stupak, in charge of the Public Safety Interoperability Implementation Act, lays the blame for the additional tragedy of preventable deaths directly at the door of inadequate funding and consequently inadequate communication resources. According to the Congressman, there is a basic lack of interoperability across more than 80% of the United States' first responders. They are not able to communicate with each other, and are therefore also not able to launch adequate rescue operations, particularly during times of large-scale emergencies.

According to the report, it was found that at least 121 of the 343 fire fighters who died could have been saved had adequate communication systems been in place. For this reason, the Congressman said that grants were needed in order to ensure adequate long-term plans to prevent the large-scale loss of life.

Marsh cites the release of communications data on the day of the attacks in order to substantiate these points. In addition to 12,000 pages of oral testimony from firefighters, the 15 hours of radio transmissions show a state of disorientation and panic among rescue professionals and agencies. Inadequate communication systems meant that rescue workers could not coordinate their efforts efficiently. As a result, both rescue workers and civilians who might have been saved were not. This is the direct result of first responders being unable to communicate with each other. During the time of the report, this was recognized as a critical necessity in search and rescue operations. The lesson learned during 2001 is not one that the United States could afford to have to relearn during another attack.

ii. Rescue professionals unable to communicate

Chandler & Feinberg (2007: 61) emphasize the need of proper communication systems in order to ensure proper rescue operations during crisis situations. They note that all too often the costs involved in adequate interoperability costs lives, as indeed they did during 9/11. The authors cite the strategies used in Anne Arundel County (MD) in order to demonstrate their points. In this large and complex region, it was recognized that an integrated communications network was essential to properly handle complex crises and rescue operations. Furthermore, the county also uses a hierarchical, responsibility-specific communication plan, by means of which each responder involved in the situation will know exactly how to handle responsibility and implement the response.

In addition to these communication paradigms, integrate voice, data, and standards-based video conferencing systems were also implemented. These further clarify the roles of each responder during specific rescue operations. As such, the fire department, department of health, police, and other rescue agencies in the county are fully integrated in terms of communication, and can therefore respond to crises upon the platform of complete interoperability.

The authors also note that new technology is vital in order to ensure continued efficiency and interoperability. Specifically, they note the high-definition video, portable Web cameras, and streaming and archiving solutions can be used to increase such efficiency (Chandler & Feinberg 2007: 62). Clearly, the authors do not regard investments in new communications technology as a waste of money when considered in the life of potentially saved lives as a result of increased interoperability.

i. FCC Rebanding mandate

In the light of the above-mentioned disasters, it appears that the government is indeed attempting to take measures for the improvement of nationwide communications technology. According to the Southeast Minnesota Public Safety Radio Website (2009), the Federal Communications Commission called for the implementation of 800 MHz radio systems. An increasing amount of networks across the country are adopting the new system in order to streamline their communication systems.

The Utah Communications Agency Network (UCAN) is one of these. It implemented a plan to standardize and simplify the process. UCAN has 18,000 user radios that needed to be rebanded. In order to handle this mandate efficiently, the agency assembled a rebanding team that integrated all interested and involved parties. This enabled a realistic process that was both standardized and efficient. The end result was that communications were improved and that a system is now in place to provide adequate communication networks during disaster situations. Furthermore, these communications reduce interference and provide overall better communications.

According to UCAN (2009), the FCC ordered 800 MHz frequencies to be reconfigured in order to reduce interference on public safety systems. This entailed a very complex and time-consuming process, particularly for large networks such as UCAN. The mandate challenged the maintenance of high quality services to users. The process was thoroughly negotiated in terms of reimbursement and collaboration, which resulted in a successful end result that also incurred acceptable costs.

The State of Delaware (2007) purchased and implemented a statewide 800 MHz Digital Trunked Radio System as early as 1993. This system provided communications on a statewide level for all government agencies, including fire and emergency services and federal agencies. It provides 95% in-street coverage by means of portable radios.

Implementation was a lengthy process, to occur in three stages. The construction of 18 original tower sites to support the new system only began in 1996, nearly three years after the original purchase.

The three phases of implementation corresponded to the three counties of the state, and incorporated a digital microwave infrastructure. All three systems were accepted in 1998, although final acceptance was delayed by in-street coverage issues. The contractor, Motorola, upgraded portables and mobiles at no cost to the state in order to resolve these final issues. Final acceptance for the 800 MHz system was granted in June 2001. Further developments occurred during 2002, when the existing communications site was expanded and further upgraded.

A further five initiatives were contracted with Motorola in 2004. The first concerned in-building coverage, the second the upgrade of dispatch consoles, the third an upgrade to the master control system platform, the fourth an upgrade to regional intra- an interoperability, and finally the replacement of the 800 MHz analog radios system with a digital system of the same frequency. The final implementation was projected for October 2008.

Clearly, in both of the above cases, the state network agencies regarded the implementation and upgrade of the 800 MHz communication systems as a necessary part of their emergency preparedness operations. And certainly, in the light of the lessons from major disasters such as 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, such systems are a necessary part of a targeted and orderly emergency response system. As such, there are several advantages to the implementation of an adequate communication system.

ii. Benefits of 800 MHz Systems

The FCC mandate was issued as a result of the limitations revealed by disasters such as those mentioned above. When considering the advantages as opposed to the costs of the system, it is clear why some states comply with the mandate with little resistance. Firstly, the available radio spectrum is increasingly strained by the number of users. The new system makes better and more efficient use of the spectrum, while also allowing a larger number of users at the same time. This is a particularly beneficial feature for large jurisdictions, where communications are vital in order to effectively handle emergencies and other policing duties. The increase in number of users is enabled by the system's use of a pool of frequencies, assigning any unused frequency to any user at a given time (Southeast Minnesota Public Safety Radio).

Furthermore, trunked systems also include more flexibility than traditional systems. Complex channel assignments are easily set up by computer, while reconfiguration can also be accomplished without necessarily needing the help of a technician. Police departments can also use the computerized systems to add additional channels for use in emergency situations.

Conventional systems are much more limited than truncated systems, with each user being able to use only one assigned frequency. This would create problems such as busy channels, even when police are in need of communications during emergency situations.

Trunked systems use satellite receivers for complete coverage, with each channel including a pair of frequencies. The FCC provided 250 channel pairs for the police, fire department, and other emergency response agencies. The new mandate is therefore designed to increase communication efficiency, particularly during times when channels are likely to be constricted.

Finally, a major advantage of the new system, although more sophisticated than traditional communications technology, is that it provides greater convenience and simplicity for the user. Years of research was implemented to simplify the system, which the user can work with the simple push of a button. An electronic switching system is controlled by a computer, from which the user benefits by increased simplicity.

In addition to the obvious advantages of use and channel availability, federal assistance programs are also available for the implementation of trunked systems. These help to mitigate the often considerable costs and other complications of implementation and upgrading.

b. Federal Assistance

Federal agencies can assist emergency management professionals by implementing integrated communications modules. PSSI Inc. (2009) for example offers reporting systems such as the Emergency Management-Based Reporting System (EMBRS RMS). This provides multi-agency capability, data sharing and accuracy in reporting and records management.

Homeland Security (2009) professes its awareness of the necessity for adequate communications, as dictated by the tragic events of 9/11. The agency is therefore committed to provide what help it can for states to implement the systems necessary to support such communications via federal grant programs. An example of such a program is SAFECOM. This program was established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). It is designated as a high-priority E-Gov initiative by the President's management Council, and is implemented to increase interoperability among agencies on a state and nationwide scale.

Programs such as SAFECOM are designed to help mitigate the costs of implementing adequate communication systems. In order to accomplish this, several federal agencies are involved in the process of optimizing the program to serve its purpose adequately. The Office of Emergency Communication for example supports the development of guidance, tools and templates for SAFECOM, while the office for Interoperability and Compatibility supports its research, development, testing, evaluation and standards. In addition, leadership issues are handle by the Directorate for National Protection and Programs and the Science and Technology Directorate.

Furthermore, SAFECOM also relies on the experience an requirements of local and state emergency response practitioners for the best solutions to interoperability issues. It is therefore a practitioner-driven program while also relying on funding and support from federal institutions and programs (Homeland Security, 2009).

Other initiatives include RapidCom, initiated by President Bush during 2004. This initiative entailed the availability of a minimum emergency response interoperability level in ten high-threat urban areas. This initiative has been completed successfully.

SAFECOM has also negotiated a partnership with the Commonwealth of Virginia to implement statewide interoperable communications. This resulted in the Statewide Communications Interoperability Planning (SCIP) Methodology, by which practitioner input is used for successful strategic planning.

SAFECOM has also released a Statement of Requirements for public communications interoperability. Through this statement, crucial voice and data communications are clearly delineated and defined. The nation has 60,000 emergency response agencies. The SoR provides these agencies with a concrete document that explicates precisely the interoperability standards for adequate communications throughout the country. Such a document is an important step towards ensuring that preventable deaths such as those occurring during 9/11 and Katrina will not be repeated.

Another government initiative established to ensure the nation's safety by means of warning systems, involves the NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 2009) together with several other agencies. The working group, established by Vice President Gore in 1998, was brought together to obtain solutions for communications and interoperability. It is the commitment of the working group to provide hazard warnings in a better, faster, more affordable and more effective way. This initiative is heavily involved in the telecommunications industry and make use of the most recent technology in order to ensure success.

IV. COST vs. BENEFIT

The main question addressed in terms of cost, is whether the implementation of the most current trunked communications system is worth the cost when considering its benefits. Once again, it is useful to consider the disasters of the past. Hurricane Katrina and the 9/11 attacks, as well as other less large-scale disasters, were extremely costly in terms of human lives. Many of these lives could have been saved had effective communication systems been in place. The lack of such systems created an extremely poor impression of the competence of rescue and government agencies. Furthermore, citizens' trust in the government to provide safety and security for its citizens was damaged to an extreme degree.

Surely these costs far outweigh any financial jurisdictional costs to the implementation of thorough interoperability systems. In addition to the obvious benefits of adequate communications, these systems also enjoy the benefit of federal assistance programs. The costs to individual jurisdictions in real financial terms will therefore be much less significant when weighed against the costs of the disasters mentioned above.

In addition, better communication systems have the additional benefit of overall better rescue and policing services, not only during major emergencies, but also during general policing and smaller rescue operations. It therefore benefits individual jurisdictions on a daily basis while also benefiting the country as a whole in terms of adequate communication in case of major emergencies.

In obtaining an answer to the question of costs vs. benefit, the above surely makes it clear that the benefits far outweigh the costs of implementing optimal communications systems. Indeed, one might even go as far as asking whether the nation can afford not to implement such systems.

V. CONCLUSION

Clearly, the government is taking the communications issue very seriously in the light of the lessons learned during 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina. Individual jurisdictions would do well to do all in their power, as many have, in order to implement optimal communication systems. There is a clear effort towards improving communications throughout states and the country as well.

This is an encouraging trend in terms of the country's future ability to mitigate disasters and ensure the professional implementation of rescue operations. Furthermore, adequate communication systems will also provide the country with an integrated information system to obtain accurate information when disasters occur.

Surely no cost is higher than the unnecessary loss of human life. In terms of such important issues, it is important that the country supports any systems that will enhance the interoperability of its nationwide rescue operations. The benefits of these far outweigh the costs of their implementation.