Status of "plain language" replacing 10 (etc) codes

KMA367 · Sep 5, 2016

It'sure been over a decade now since FEMA/DHS and others proposed the abandonment of radio "codes" (900s, 10- and 11- codes) and replacing them with "clear speech" or "plain English" to theoretically standardize radio talk among first responders.

The pro and con debates raged on for quite a while so I don't want to reopen that can of worms, but I'd like to hear some reports of agencies across California who've made that switch.

I think most State Agencies (notably CHP) have stayed with the old codes, and the fire service pretty much stopped using most codes long before 9/11 and Katrina triggered the change, so no real need to hear about them, but others - and how it's worked out? Thanks. 10-4?

For a start, all city and county LEAs in Humboldt County dropped the use of all but a couple 10-codes around 2008... though they still use just a few like 10-27, -28, and -29. And 11-44. But good ol' "Roger" (or "copy") is now the standard acknowledgement word.

kg6nlw · Sep 5, 2016

From what I've heard and seen, most agencies mix it up. Some use "plain language" along with codes, while others use strictly codes. I don't think I've heard many departments using all "plain language". This goes for both fire and LEO.

Regards,

-Frank C.

MikeyC · Sep 5, 2016

Out here in the Midwest there's still a lot of 10-codes (and others) on the PD side with the FD side trending more towards the plain language side of things. "Message received" in lieu of "10-4" is very common.

For the most part around me out here in the middle of nowhere in North Central Illinois the fire is all plain language save using "10-50" for accidents but then again all of the FDs around here are dispatched by PDs so some of that carries over.

gmclam · Sep 5, 2016

What I find is they speak codes in code. It's NOT 10-28 & 10-29, it's just 28s and 29s. Or it's not 10-97 or 10-98, it's just 97 or 98.

What I also find is that each area has some acronyms that you virtually have to be local to know. I think they speed up time to communicate over the radio. For example ARB is American River Bridge (could be any of them) or MSJ is Mercy San Juan Hospital.

If you're getting assitance from a neighboring agency, like what happened on 9/11, then some acronyms will not be known, some will. Or worse, the receiver will translate them into something totally different than was intended.

SCPD · Sep 5, 2016

From what I have seen many fire agencies use plain language. Law end most still use a code system whether it is state issued or localized coding. Now I can say when interop happens and interops used or other agencies jump in unless the coding used is very similiar all revert to plain language. Just what I see and hear at work daily.

Station51 · Sep 6, 2016

10-9

Your message 10-1. Please. 10-9.

N4GIX · Sep 6, 2016

Charles 2 1 10-8 10-76 to your 10-20.

FWIW, I haven't heard any 10-code being used here in NW Indiana, nor the Chicago PD either.

cvfd625 · Sep 6, 2016

In Kern County (Bakersfield) , California, public safety rarely uses interoperability channels despite the fact the county has good infrastructure in place to allow it. Almost all communication between agencies is relayed through dispatchers over the telephone. (Even though this method delays messages and information is often lost in the transfer.) So plain talk hasn't been much of an issue here.

Nationally, I have listened to larger law enforcement agencies online that no longer use 10 codes and communication seems to work fine without it. I think whatever arguments the CHP or any other large law enforcement agencies have for the continued use of them are not valid.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

David628 · Sep 6, 2016

DOJ uses plain language

I worked for a DOJ agency from 2002-11 prior to moving over to my new job here in Colorado and we were taught in FLETC (Federal LE Training Center) to use plain language over the radios. I know its not Cali, but here in Colorado Springs the local, county and state folks seem to use a little of both.

ke6gcv · Sep 6, 2016

It's a mixed bag where I live.

n3obl · Sep 6, 2016

Those fema and dhs orders were guidelines. They don't carry force of law.

cvfd625 · Sep 7, 2016

davidsbmw628 said:
I worked for a DOJ agency from 2002-11 prior to moving over to my new job here in Colorado and we were taught in FLETC (Federal LE Training Center) to use plain language over the radios. I know its not Cali, but here in Colorado Springs the local, county and state folks seem to use a little of both.

I did notice when the US Marshal Service came to Kern County to assist with a manhunt last year, they used plain talk when on Sheriff channels.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

KK4JUG · Sep 7, 2016

In Columbus, GA, plain language lasted about 45 minutes. We don't even use the 10-codes (except for the common ones like 10-9, 10-4, etc.). We use 4-digit codes that indicate the event and, to a certain extent, the status of the event. (The codes are listed elsewhere here in RR.)

A quick example:

7500 is a business burglary and that code is given to the primary responding officer. If it's a burglary in progress, it's dispatched as a 7501. Any back-up officers would be dispatched as 7502. If it's only an attempted burglary, it's a 7503. It goes on from there.

The fact of the matter is, the first officer would respond to a 7501 and other officers would be told to backup Unit xx on a 7501 but their "run code" would also be listed as a 7501

The idea is to closely track the types of calls officers respond to. These are not used for crime reporting. Rather, it supposed to be used toward manpower utilization. The concept doesn't track the calls as well as it should because the dispatchers don't use the assigned number as they should. It was instituted back in the early 70s when the city got its first mainframe computer and it continues.

Rred · Sep 7, 2016

"when the US Marshal Service came to Kern County "
This could be because the itinerant Feds have experience dealing with many different venues. And they've learned from experience that when you use jargon, and the natives don't? You hear a lot of "Huh?" over the radio. "Huh?" not being a very good way to make things happen when you need anything quickly.
But convincing a local PD or FD, that rarely has used or been called out for mutual aid, that there's a REASON to change "the way things have always been done here". Ah. The only fast way to do that is to say "This is the new DHS standard, and if you don't comply, ALL of your funding and grants will be cut off."
Which, curiously enough, is what DHS stated about ten years ago. Agencies used to be allowed to submit a statement of why they were not NIMS-compliant, and that letter was all they needed. Then DHS changed their terms after a couple of years and said "Comply, with everything, or all your grants get cut off. Period." And all of a sudden, agencies started complying. At least on paper, if not enthusiastically.
When something big eventually does happen, like a major quake in California, all sorts of responders are going to be glad to find out they're on the same page. Even if the lead agency is the military.

WQPW689 · Sep 7, 2016

Rred said:
"when the US Marshal Service came to Kern County "
This could be because the itinerant Feds have experience dealing with many different venues. And they've learned from experience that when you use jargon, and the natives don't? You hear a lot of "Huh?" over the radio. "Huh?" not being a very good way to make things happen when you need anything quickly.
But convincing a local PD or FD, that rarely has used or been called out for mutual aid, that there's a REASON to change "the way things have always been done here". Ah. The only fast way to do that is to say "This is the new DHS standard, and if you don't comply, ALL of your funding and grants will be cut off."
Which, curiously enough, is what DHS stated about ten years ago. Agencies used to be allowed to submit a statement of why they were not NIMS-compliant, and that letter was all they needed. Then DHS changed their terms after a couple of years and said "Comply, with everything, or all your grants get cut off. Period." And all of a sudden, agencies started complying. At least on paper, if not enthusiastically.
When something big eventually does happen, like a major quake in California, all sorts of responders are going to be glad to find out they're on the same page. Even if the lead agency is the military.

Where is the directive from DHS stating anyone's going to lose funds because they don't switch to plain language? Was it for some reason just directed at California?

If there is one, it sure didn't make it's way to South Florida LE because virtually all agencies I can monitor just love their codes. OTOH, it seems Fire and EMS have enthusiastically embraced plain talk.

cifd64 · Sep 7, 2016

They backed off the Requirement for day-to-day communications. It IS a requirement for all multi-agency incidents where interoperability is needed/used. NIMS compliance only applies to these incidents, not a traffic stop.

ecps92 · Sep 7, 2016

And so many of those ICS/NIMS training programs are available
On-Line and FREE IS-100, 200, 700, 800

Even to the GP :wink:
Emergency Management Institute - Independent Study (IS) | Course List

cifd64 said:
They backed off the Requirement for day-to-day communications. It IS a requirement for all multi-agency incidents where interoperability is needed/used. NIMS compliance only applies to these incidents, not a traffic stop.

Rred · Sep 7, 2016

"Where is the directive from DHS stating anyone's going to lose funds because they don't switch to plain language? Was it for some reason just directed at California?"
The "directive" is the National Incident Management System and the Incident Command System. Both specify that plain language shall be used at all times, somewhere in all the pages.
If you expect me to remember a ten year old DHS citation saying that all agencies SHALL CONFORM, good luck. Someone in your agency should be painfully aware of that.

ecps92 · Sep 7, 2016

Plenty of reading, found thru Mr Google
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/PlainLanguageFAQs_0.pdf
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/PlainLanguageGuide_0.pdf

WQPW689 said:
Where is the directive from DHS stating anyone's going to lose funds because they don't switch to plain language? Was it for some reason just directed at California?

If there is one, it sure didn't make it's way to South Florida LE because virtually all agencies I can monitor just love their codes. OTOH, it seems Fire and EMS have enthusiastically embraced plain talk.

KK4JUG · Sep 7, 2016

Rred said:
"Where is the directive from DHS stating anyone's going to lose funds because they don't switch to plain language? Was it for some reason just directed at California?"
The "directive" is the National Incident Management System and the Incident Command System. Both specify that plain language shall be used at all times, somewhere in all the pages.
If you expect me to remember a ten year old DHS citation saying that all agencies SHALL CONFORM, good luck. Someone in your agency should be painfully aware of that.

Good luck trying to enforce the day-to-day operations of thousands of agencies.

Status of "plain language" replacing 10 (etc) codes

Member

Railroad & Ham Radio Extrodinare

Member

Member

QRT

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Ø

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads