European Union's proposed Telecom Single Market Regulation fails to address Emergency Comms Services

The European Union Parliament over the past several years has been updating and drafting new legislation to create a single market regulatory framework for telecom carrier operators across Europe for both traditional and wireless public and commercial communications services.. The primary focus is to eliminate overlapping tariffs by national governments on everything from long distance rates to mobile phone roaming fees. The legislation has passed through the committee stage and is now set to go before a full parliamentary vote.

Under the the EU's proposed Single Market regulations for telecom - Connected Continent, it fails to address existing or next generation emergency regulatory requirements and just as critical, who would be in control if the operator is headquartered in one country but has a failure in another? A single regulator oversight body is a complex and demanding environment. It will impact how telecom carriers behave and set up emergency communications capabilities, repair and maintenance procedures and network capacity. There are hundreds of issues that have not been addressed. The International Telecommunications Union and its groups such as the Internet Society (ISOC) , Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and others such as the Global Systems Mobile Association (GSMA) appear to have been pushed aside or simply gone along without comment. There is no mention of operational standards, performance requirements, inter-operability guidelines, or regulatory oversight procedures for Emergency Communications services included in the proposed legislation.

The EU's process for drafting and creating new legislation is of significant concern. The committee and elected members ignore long term ramifications without advance analysis or public and civic hearings prior to entering final reviews. While it is commendable to improve competitive enterprise requirements across a large multinational region, if it fails to take into account essential service requirements and delivery needs. It will cost Europeans far more years down the road and in fact, could have tragic consequences.

Bureaucracy is a necessary evil. Procedures, protocol and rules are the underpinnings in daily operations of a large infrastructure. It requires maintenance, supervision and standards to ensure that the system can function across multiple platforms, applications, and technical service needs of thousands of Emergency response services and agencies which are heavily scrutinized and are regulated. The legislation proposes a single regulatory body that would be capable of overruling local or national government equivalents without caveats. There is a veto clause, but it is unclear as to how it would operate or function on elements of public and civic protection safety. The authors of the legislation stress one of the key goals is to eliminate red tape and that in creating a single European regulator, they can build a set of rules that are common sense and minimize obstacles. That single catchall framework is a potential landmine that both traditional copper landline and mobile wireless operators. It will create different interpretations with little or no oversight regarding emergency communication specifications or governance. It is puzzling that such a basic essential service requirement has been overlooked. The committee's emphasize the need for an open and free internet (Net Neutrality) in the legislation, yet do not address how this will dramatically impact essential emergency services if left unspecified with clear and precise documentation and regulatory procedures.

It refers to an open and neutral internet. It is expected that social media and geo-spatial information system (GIS) technology will supplement crisis and disaster response services. It is already used to distribute emergency information to the public and in some cases, get help sent to impacted locations and individuals. No standards regarding privacy, monitoring, response support are offered in the legislation. Nor does it address critical communications inter-operability demands now placed on civic protection organizations that are being addressed in various levels of capability and ability. Emergency communications services costs vary between countries based on existing regulatory requirements. In some regions, no service levels exist, yet where does the EU stand on a single framework if it is to properly create an equal and level playing ground. A mobile operator's capabilities in delivering emergency communications may be reduced or eliminated if its competitors are not required to carry out service to the same requirements and capacity. These issues scratch the surface of the problems that lie ahead should the EU proceed without further review. The failure to investigate and carry out due diligence, potentially exposes the EU to serious liabilities and consequences.

The cart before the horse analogy comes to mind for the older generation. For next gens, it would be a connected disaster before continental support.

Policy leaders need to review Critical Infrastructure for the Future

Firefighters at Gadiv Oil Refinery fire in Haifa. HAZMAT team criticized for arriving late.
 (Photo: Haifa FD - See article in our DDRS Magazine)

Disaster Managers are continually faced with elements that are beyond their control. It is a matter of fait accompli and implements response assets with what is available. In other words, it is not rocket science. But if policy makers understood the consequences based on known gaps and analysis, response agency success would dramatically improve. David Lincoln offers this overview addressing some of the issues requiring increased awareness and review in the United States.

Infrastructure Threats: The Path Ahead

There are many threats out there. Heads of industry, government officials, and private associations are raising awareness of the vulnerability of the U.S infrastructure. There is fear amongst all of them that an attack or failure in the system or technology will result in long-term consequences and potential collapse of the infrastructure.

Hostile Threats versus Natural Threats

Hostile Threats

These are the forces that threaten to physically attack and disrupt the normal operation of infrastructure. These threats include: 

•       Terrorism: domestic and foreign
•        Competitive domestic and foreign powers
•         Individuals with a hostile intent towards the government or business 

The problem is that planning cycles are extremely rapid for these entities. They are constantly adapting their strategies and can evolve their tactics to new security measures.

Natural Threats

These forces that deteriorate infrastructure. These are the forces of time, weather and neglect, and include:

• Failure of aging steel, concrete and other materials
• Weakened structures from natural events and over use
• Technology and process failures 

The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) report card gives America’s infrastructure a “D” rating. Inland waterways, levees, energy, dams, and drinking water all fall within the “D” grade from ASCE. It is estimated that the investment needed by 2020 is $3.6 Trillion.

Key Challenges to Future Infrastructure: The Big Three

Improve Coordination Between the Government and Private Sector

There is no system for government agencies to provide industry with information regarding the threats to the Nation’s infrastructure. The result is that businesses and utilities have different understandings of the security vulnerabilities, the protections that are effective, and the investments that may be required to secure their infrastructure.

To help with these problems, many state governments are integrating private enterprise into state fusion centers. This is a positive approach. Not only does it provide a way to build distributable intelligence, it makes it deliverable in a consistent and timely fashion. Another positive step are the efforts DHS is making to communicate the facts behind its risk-based approach to commercial companies. The risk profile facing companies will continue to change. There is a need to educate business on how this will impact their critical infrastructure. 

De-Centralize the Nations Infrastructure

The current trend is to centralize the nation’s infrastructure, with both technology platforms and supply chain assets functioning around a central hub. In fact, many industries, such as electric, gas and telecommunications are part of a national or regional grid structure.

Threats will come from many different angles, but will be focused on these centralized points of failure. There is a high level of inter-dependency among these systems and a single penetration into a network may have a catastrophic, cascading effect on the whole system.

De-centralizing the infrastructure may be the best defense. However, his will require a new vision and a look to the future state of the Nation’s infrastructure.

The Nation’s Aging Infrastructure

A major threat to the infrastructure is not going to come from the outside, but from within. The fact is that our infrastructure is aging, and too many are doing too little to reverse this natural decline. This deterioration will accelerate as society grows and changes. Future estimated demands on infrastructure:

·        By 2025, the global population is expected to be 7.9 billion, mostly in developing countries. A growth rate that exceeds the ability of many countries to upgrade and expand capacity of existing infrastructure.

·        Climate change will impact cities in coastal locations, resource-dependent regions and economies that are closely linked with climate-sensitive infrastructure

The American Society of Civil Engineers gave this opinion of our infrastructure’s resilience. According to the ASCE, "The condition of our nation’s roads, bridges, drinking water systems and other public works have shown little to no improvement since they were graded an overall D+ in 2001, with some areas sliding toward failing grades." The opinion of William Henry, former President of the ASCE is that “We need to establish a comprehensive, long-term infrastructure plan as opposed to our current ‘patch and pray’ method to ensure a better quality of life for everyone.”

It doesn’t matter whether infrastructure is lost due to hostile or natural threats. It is essential to develop a long-range plan, in conjunction with ASCE’s ideas that addresses infrastructure upgrades. The focus has been on prevention and the restoration of assets is sometimes forgotten. The issue of aging infrastructure needs to be a national agenda item and new technologies used to monitor our critical infrastructure.

Final Thoughts 

The Nation’s infrastructure and those protecting it have many challenges in order for it to be considered acceptable by most security standards and still be profitable to the business leaders. A willingness to work with government agencies to develop a comprehensive approach to infrastructure protection, the issues of security and reliability become very correctable problems.

David Lincoln, BS, EMT-P, CFE is a Fire Battalion Chief and Disaster Manager in Texas, USA. David is in his twenty-seventh year of emergency and disaster response providing services on a domestic and international level. David is part of the disaster management team for the Texas State Operations Center and works in the Planning Section during declared disasters. David is also a guest lecturer and instructor at the Academy for Crisis Management, Emergency Planning and Civil Protection, a division of the German Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance in Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, Germany.

Multinational military operation comes together to find missing B-777

Getty Image (2014) from the Telegraph (UK) Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency
Commander sets mission search grid into on-board computer.
Link

Disaster Management is not a isolated group of people and assets inside a bubble. It often requires teamwork and expertise from outside normal channels and organizations. We have seen large scale disaster operations bring in domestic and international military units as full partners in support a disaster response. It often makes the difference between success or failure during recovery operations.
This has been particularly true since governments have made the military and important part of disaster management policy. Successful operations go back prior to the turn of the century.

Malaysia Airline's B-777 missing since March 8, 2014 is a disaster recovery operation requiring not only Malaysian military support, but also those of its allies, in particular, the U.S. Navy, which has sent ships and aviation experts from its National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Federal Aviation Agency (FAA). A unique asset that has been deployed is the US Navy's newest surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft based on a Boeing B-737-800 series commercial aircraft, the Poseidon P-8.

The U.S. Navy is upgrading and replacing older platforms, in particular its Lockheed P-3 Orion's. But this time, the Navy went in a unique direction, specifying that the aircraft be based on a commercial off the shelf (COTS) platform and be fully inter-operable with not only military networks and technology, but also civilian equivalents. This the first operational disaster recovery deployment of the P-8 since it began to roll of the assembly line in production trim in 2012. Twelve P-8's (of  a planned 117) are now operational.

Several International versions are also in production for India and Australia. It is not yet known if Australia will deploy theirs (it has sent a P-3 Orion) while India has sent one of their P-8I's in support. The amount of area to cover is immense. (see link of Satellite imagery area covered in our Flipboard Magazine) The P-8 can stay airborne for 4 hours plus transit time of  1,200 nautical miles. Over the coming days, this P-8 and 34 other aircraft will be flying hundreds of flight hours covering an area of approximately 8,000 square nautical miles.

Like the Typhoon Haiyan / Yolanda response, this will be a coordinated effort involving military units from 15 nations in addition to Malaysia; Australia, Bangladesh, Brunei, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, United States and Vietnam. This is probably the largest civil multinational military disaster recovery operation to take place since Haiyan, which involved 12 nations and required very little integration. This time around it is very different as assignments and information coordination will be critical to its success.  It will place significant stress search team coordinators as factors such as the weather and ocean conditions interfere with search and recovery efforts. Teams will be required to be vigilant in not overlapping or missing search areas. The ocean does not offer street signs or the ability to anchor physical markers. It will all rest on the shoulders of mission planners and grids on a map, electronic or paper ensuring every square mile of land and ocean is covered. It sounds easy, but it far from it, when organizing a multinational military group that operate in different languages, procedures and operational capabilities, all funneling into a civilian government that has very little experience dealing with this type of event. Everything from a De Havilland Twin Otter to a B-737 in the air, to Coast Guard Cutters and fast Frigates are being used, all with different areas of responsibility, mission capability, search coverage limits and crew duration differences.

Getty Images (2014) from the Telegraph (UK)
Philippine soldiers review map to begin search operations.
Link

Only time will tell if the techniques and plans implemented were successful. It will certainly be an mission that will be recorded with many lessons learned by all the participants and likely be repeated in sand tables exercises around the world.

Malaysia Airlines and government learning Disaster Management on the fly

Generic example of Air Traffic Control Radar Scope tracking airliners

Malaysian Airlines Flight MH-370 vanishes. It is a regularly operated flight between Kuala Lumpur and Beijing. The airline's management is now stuck in an impossible situation with few options. It does not know the status or reasons why the B-777 disaster has occurred. Only that it has. What is the best approach in handling this crisis and disaster?

The airline industry is a complex organization, operated and managed by advanced technology. It has undergone incredible technical and process transformation since the first commercial flights in the 1930's. Airline management knows about danger and risks. Aircraft are complex machines that consumers simply consider as one more mode of transportation available to get from A to B. It is a competitive and high cost conscious industry, operated in multiple methods to organize and deliver transportation services to the travelling public. It has to adhere to strict and bureaucratic rules and regulations thousands of pages long. Maintenance engineering has become a sophisticated, demanding a highly skilled workforce either internally or sub-contracted. Flight schedule management is highly scrutinized and  is now automated down to the last bit of efficiency, from fuel management to cargo loads measured to the exact weight the aircraft is configured. Not all airlines follow the same precise level of detail, but the majority of them do. Aviation safety is not only mandatory, but recognized by airline executives as priority #1. In some countries, the airlines technology is more advanced than the regulators that monitor them. A Boeing B-777 is worth 250 million dollars each with millions more invested in infrastructure to support it. They are not managed like your local bus running across town.

When one of your airliners, one of the most advanced aircraft in the world, a Boeing wide body B-777 goes missing, it demands a whole new set of skills and management experience to work through the crisis now facing the company. But there are limitations and risks if not prepared properly and as is often the case during these types of events, common sense is the primary tool that should be used. So far, the airline has done exactly that. There is always a sense you are not doing enough. When you do not know what has happened, disclose this to those that will be supporting your efforts in finding out what has occurred followed by the exact same procedure with affected customers. There are significant public and internal pressures to resolve what has occurred. Compounding Malaysian Airline's problems is the reliance on other organizations to support the airline through this event. In this case, the Malaysian governments public safety agencies and the military, all of whom are not accountable or in direct support to the airline. It is a difficult situation to find oneself in. We have documented many of these challenges in our Crisis and Disaster Management Magazine.

The news media has made this situation worse, publishing unconfirmed reports and rumors from unidentified sources. Foreign government announcements are fueling speculation of what has happened and demanding answers - now. Meanwhile, Malaysian Airlines is put into the position and perception that it is helpless and incompetent. It cannot criticize public safety officials and nor can it intervene in what other governments are demanding, particularly if they do not know anymore than the guy on the street corner does. The airline has fully cooperated with aviation authorities and government investigators with any and all information they want. It does not know what has transpired and continues to state this position, yet news media and others hammer away at the company. Boeing, the manufacturer of the B-777 has held steadfast in its silence since the disaster occurred. This has been their policy for decades. Why is Malaysian Airlines being held to a different set of standards? Crisis management is often about doing less than trying to do something just for the sake of perception. In my opinion, it has done a remarkable job considering how many vultures are circling overhead. Remain calm.

Malaysian Airlines has not been silent, but it has been cautious in its approach. 

Malaysia is a growing and modern country spanning across two geographically separated regions bordering three major ocean basins covering 329,000 square kilometers. Its government is based on the British Westminster Constitutional system with a population of just over 28 million. It's modernization since the end of World War II and independence from the United Kingdom has been breath taking since 1957. Its institutions are expanding and gaining experience with capabilities that are in an era of learning and rapid growth. It's Royal Malaysian Air Force and Navy is still young with very little experience in disaster response roles and responsibilities. The military leadership is complicated by historical sovereignty challenges and requirements. Its coastal defense and naval coastguard are small in size and capabilities relative to other surrounding nations. It has not faced a major disaster like this since independence 57 years ago. The government is learning on the job like Malaysian Airlines what crisis and disaster management is.

Everyone knows something, or thinks they do. The instinct to tell people what you know is often impulsive regardless of the quality of the information The government is going through damage control dealing with this crisis on multiple levels as leaks or misunderstandings wreck havoc in and outside of their domain, as inaccurate information flies across the internet and news outlets. Significant resources are being wasted during this phase of operations. The Malaysian Government has wisely asked for international assistance, bringing with it, a new set of management challenges while still attempting to maintain control of the situation. It is proving to be a daunting undertaking for senior government officials the military and its national airline.

It is likely, the investigation will take up to two years, perhaps longer before flight MH-370 is solved. There can be little doubt that the B-777 will be eventually found. The resources and technology used will follow the same pattern and procedures as those used to investigate Air France Flight AF-447 over the Atlantic ocean in 2011. In the meantime, Malaysia's airline and government is learning the perils and obstacles when faced with an international incident that has worldwide attention. This crisis will pass. Lessons will be learned and enable all the stakeholders to fly high into the future.

6th Annual Crisis and Disaster Management Summer Academy

5th Annual BBK Summer Academy, Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, Germany

Training and specialized courses is an important part of a individual's Crisis and Disaster Manager's career. For many students, it is difficult to comprehend the complexities involved. The Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) is the central organizational element for civil security of the German Ministry of Interior. The BBK fills this need with an interdisciplinary approach to safety prevention providing an efficient integrated protective system for population and their basis of living by producing one of the finest Crisis and Disaster Management programs in the world. Every year the organization offers a unique program, an two week International Summer Academy.

I have been a guest lecturer and instructor at this Academy since 2012 and find the students to be highly motivated, bringing energy with a high degree of eagerness to learn. The program is rich with content with guest lectures addressing problems at the local, regional, national and international crisis and disaster management level. Students will find knowledge transfer from around the world will enhance their education and further their personal and professional understanding in this field. It is one of the most rewarding experiences you will ever have. Lecturer's from 12 countries from across Europe, Canada and the United States, all highly experienced in crisis and disaster management will be in attendance in addition to specialists in disaster management technology, applications and sciences. You will not find a better mix of faculty and staff that all have past deployment experience, anywhere in the world.

The 6th annual Summer Academy will be hosted at the BBK's facility in Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany, July 21st to August 1st, 2014, located approximately 45 minutes south of Cologne (Köln) International Airport or 2 hours from Frankfurt. Trains are available to the area from every major city in Germany.

Candidates should be enrolled in a Crisis and Disaster Management University Masters Program. However this is not mandatory and will be reviewed by BBK on a case by case basis. The courses and accommodations are free. Students are required to pay for their own travel, immigration - customs Visa's and personal expenses. Over 500 students from 40 countries have attended since its inception.

You can find contact details and application forms at this LINK. Space is limited.

Hope to see you there!