MA1 Talkgroup Discussion (Continued from Traffic in NE Indiana)

[hcsd35-32]

This discussion is continued from this post. (Was getting a little off topic and warranted a new thread)

Mr. Winston 500:
I have been away for the weekend and just got back today to read your post and have a chance to defend myself against the many untrue things you have stated. Lets start at the top:

No official set of "rules" has been established by the State of Indiana or the State of Ohio (the systems are very similar) in regards to the 800 mhz radio system. Information that is relayed to agencies is typically done so by the Integrated Public Safety Commission (IPSC). IPSC has advised the state that C-MA channels are to be used for emergency purposes and not for station to station conversation. However, units in the field can contact each other and the agencies directly if need be.

This is not true. The IPSC has polices posted here: http://www.state.in.us/ipsc/safe-t/policies/. Look at the very last section "Regional and Statewide Interoperability Talkgroups" On the third page under recommendations. It states: "Agencies are encouraged to use the regional interoperable talkgroup (MA1) for broadcast of incidents that are considered hot calls, or other calls that may require assistance from multiple agencies operating within the same geographical area. The ability for every public safety officer to receive these types of calls is critical. Agencies should not be hesitant in the use of MA1 for dispatch of these calls." This is what we want to do at my agency, but the ISP communications Director has said that we cannot.

I have also personally went to a class on the use of the system, put on by the IPSC. I specifically asked the instructor about the use of the MA-1 channels and he conferred that this is the correct use of the MA-1 talkgroups.

Second you state:

Oftentimes the first person we like to push blame on is the Supervisor at the other agency. More times than not the Supervisor is just doing what they are told by their command staff. To call the supervisor at this post "crazy" is very unprofessional on your part. Intead of calling names why don't you call and speak to the supervisor professionally and ask why they do not communicate on C-MA channels.

I admit that the "crazy" comment was a bit off the wall and I shouldn't have said it. I want to apologize now for any [FONT=&quot]offense [/FONT]it caused anyone. I'm Sorry. And to explain, I know this directive came from the Comm director at ISP district 22 because our director sent out a memo stating "Do not broadcast on 800 C-MA1 per ISP Comm Supervisor" I approached her about why she so quickly rubber stamped this directive, and she wants everything to be peaceful between agencies and doesn't want to cause any "waves" by fighting this issue. I couldn't go directly to the Supervisor at ISP because she is not my supervisor and I would get in more trouble with my Supervisor for bypassing the chain of command.

Also you state:

Keep in mind the following, many of the issues surrounding why agencies cannot contact Indiana State Troopers directly on the radio and assign calls or give information is due to the fact that state law forbids this. State law states that an Indiana State Police Dispatcher must assign a call to State Police units.

I am very aware of this. We don't want to dispatch their units, we want to call their dispatchers or make general broadcasts on the MA-1 channel. Which, again is what the IPSC has designated them for.

To reply to the rest of your comments & sum up my position:
The supervisor at ISP has basically told us that we are not allowed to use C-MA1 at all. We don't want to just call ISP on it; we want to make general broadcasts that may be of interest to surrounding agencies, which includes ISP. If you listen to the other ISP districts outside of 22 (I have heard districts 16, 24, 51, & 52 do it myself) the ISP posts and the counties within those districts use the MA-1 channels for broadcast all the time. I feel very strongly about this becuse I really beleive in this system and believe communications can be greatly improved if agencies don't do things like this and take steps backwards against interoperability. I have done my research and wouldn't have made the first post if I didn't know what I was talking about and have the research and policy to back it up. I hope this explains everything and if anyone has any more questions/concerns/comments, let me know (PM or Open Post). I am an open book and would love to discuss it.

 

[turbo77577]

good day nick;
is there a way to get or find these talkgroup numbers & freqs. that isp22 would or should use ?
Jim

 

[djbrane]

If you listen to the other ISP districts outside of 22 (I have heard districts 16, 24, 51, & 52 do it myself) the ISP posts and the counties within those districts use the MA-1 channels for broadcast all the time.

I have to agree, not only have I heard other districts and also agencies "dispatching" "in progress" calls over the MA Channels, so everyone can hear them, it is also what we have been told in numerous meetings with SAFE-T Officials.
They told us all units and base stations utilizing SAFE-T are supposed to monitior the MA Channel for their district at all times. They also told us that the ISP Districts and also any other agencies are supposed to dispatch any "in progress" type call on the MA Channels.
They went further to say that was the reason the MA Channels were there, for "Interoperability purposes".

It sounds like SAFE-T officials and ISP officials do not agree on the use of the system.

 

[trido]

Never heard a MA group yet

Strange down here in Evansville we have never heard a MA group yet.

Think that might be cause the State Post doesnt have a dispatch console yet?

Not sure if that has anything to do with it you would think we would hear MA traffic.

 

[djbrane]

Sally Fay
Communications Director
317.234.2572
sfay@ipsc.state.in.us

Got this off of the SAFE-T website, maybe someone needing to know the correct answer can ask her.

I would also think if agencies utilizing SAFE-T are abiding by the policies set forth by the SAFE-T agreement, ISP would not have much say in it because it is not ISP's system, it is IPSC's. The only thing it does say is:
Coordination will be provided by the local state police district communications facility.

Just as has already been said, Nick is right on, you can't dispute what the policy says.

Below is an excerpt from the policy statement: It clearly states they encourage agencies to use MA-1 for the hot call purpose.

3) Recommendations:
Agencies are encouraged to use the regional interoperable talkgroup (MA1) for broadcast of incidents that are considered hot calls, or other calls that may require assistance from multiple agencies operating within the same geographical area.

Based upon the type of console system, the ability to simul-cast or transmit on both the primary dispatch talkgroup and MA1 can be easily accomplished. Dispatch centers should have procedures in place for setting the console to perform this function.

Examples of hot call that would qualify for regional broadcast are: pursuits, PI accidents, officer requesting aid or assistance, bank alarms, robbery in progress and other typical emergency radio traffic.

The ability for every public safety officer to receive these types of calls is critical. Agencies should not be hesitant in the use of MA1 for dispatch of these calls.

 

[scannerfreak]

Here in District 42 land..They use N_MA1 for a variety of things, mostly broadcasts. Ripley County Broadcasts most of their calls on N_MA1 along with 69-DISP, which then gets re-broadcasted by the post. I have never heard a Jefferson County Broadcast on N-MA1, but I hear their units calling the ISP troops that work that area all the time on it. I have also heard the post talk to Jefferson County dispatch on it. It is used a ton down here and seems to work out ok, all of this is still being simulcasted on Point and Low Band.

I agree, the policy states what these channels are suppose to be for and they are being used in that very way at the Versailles post and surrounding Counties, why wouldn't it be the same for other posts?. Why a comm supervisor would disallow their usage is beyond me. There must be an awful good reason we all don't know about

 

[delallen]

In Johnson county I hear Dist 52, Greenwood PD and JCSD dispatchers talking to each other alot on J-MA1. I would say they are using it like Nick stated it should be used.