ML20248G946
| ML20248G946 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 04/10/1989 |
| From: | Cohn S, Sikich G MASSACHUSETTS, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248G923 | List: |
| References | |
| OL, NUDOCS 8904140012 | |
| Download: ML20248G946 (23) | |
Text
, ____ __- _ _
d , ?
'1
@lEQ CORRESPONDENCE 5 ~
- [ g g",
UNITED STATES:OF-AMERICA U Mkc NUCLEAR REGULATORY' COMMISSION' -l
-.q
' ATOMIC SAFETY'AND LICENSING' BOARD E- @R 11 ' . P5 :59 j Before'the Administrative Judges:
0P RE .. g..,fp DGCKE!w, : , k' Ivan W. Smith, Chairman ' fRtNCH Dr. Richard F. Cole Kenneth A. McCollom 1
l 1 I ')
l In the Matter of ) Docket Nos.-50-443-OL L -) 50-444-OL PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) (Off-Site EP)-
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, EI AL. ) 4 (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
)- ' April 10, 1989~
]
]
) l TESTIMONY.OF GEARY SIKICH AND STAN COHN l ON' BEHALF OF JAMES M. SHANNON, ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS i REGARDING COMMUNICATION DEFICIENCIES i
h
.j 1
l j
l i
l l
Department of'the' Attorney General I Nuclear Safety Unit Public Protection. Bureau-l One Ashburton Place Boston, Massachusetts 02108
( .(617) 727-2200 l
8904140012 890410 l PDR ADOCK 05000443 T PDR
-s a UNITED' STATES OF' AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ,
i Before the Administrative Judges: )
l Ivan W. Smith,' Chairman Dr.. Richard F. Cole l Kenneth A. McCollom l I
1
)
In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL '
) 50-444-OL j PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) (Off-Site EP) i OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, EI AL. ) l
) l (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) ) April 10, .1989 I
- ) )
l l TESTIMONY OF GEARY SIKICH AND STAN COHN l i ON BEHALF OF JAMES M. SHANNON, ATTORNEY GENERAL j FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS REGARDING j COMMUNICATION DEFICIENCIES l 1
I' I. 1HIRODUCIIQH This testimony addresses issues pertaining to the adequacy and effectiveness of SPMC procedures and planning concerning the provision of an effective horizontal, or lateral, network of communications directly linking emergency field personnel with each other and to the delay, miscommunication and gaps in that communications network that exists in the system and may negatively impact the ability to provide for the health and 1
i safety of the general public in the event of a radiological emergency at Seabrook Station. Specifically, the testimony addresses issues raised in Joint Intervenor Contention 31. The
1 d
' testimony also addresses issues raised in Contention Mag. Ex. 1 8b in that it' discusses a deficiency that was shown to exist..in 1
the communication network linking field personnel with the EOC, ORO facilities and each other'during the FEMA Graded Exercise. (
The regulatory requirements that govern the' planning and' exercise portions of the testimony are found in 10 C.F.R. 50.47(b)(6) and (b)(8).and corresponding requirements of NUREG s
j 0654, Supp. l~at'II.F.1.b and c-and'II.H,10.
i The' testimony contained herein focuses on. deficiencies in the SPMC's procedures for communicating information between 1
field workers; deficiencies'in the.SpMC's procedures.for rapid response by/the New Hampshire Yankee Offsite. Response Organization ("NHY ORO") to information received and transmitted by field workers; deficiencies in the Emergency Radio Network's ("ERN") capability for transmitting 1information >
! to field route guides; and deficiencies in the Emergency Radio l
Network's capability for transmitting information in.a undelayed manner.
II. SYSTEM CONFIGURATION The two largest classes of NHY ORO field workers who are served by the ERN are route guides and traffic guides. The ERN also provides a communication link between four facilities'used by the NHY ORO: the EOC, the Staging Area, and the two.
Reception centers. The ERN is comprised of four paired channels that operate through the use of four repeaters. For ;
relatively short range communications, typically under a. mile,.
1 NHY ORO field workers such as traffic guides can talk directly to each other via their portable hand-held radios. however, for-1.
i l ;
1
4 (y
The vast majo'rity of' communications between field workers the four repeaters must be used. This results in a radio capability such that only four-ORO field' workers'can communicate with each other at any given timefvia the ERN.
ORO assigns-the four channels to four specific user' functions. One channel is designed to handle communications-
.between the four facilities previously mentioned: the'EOC, the.
Staging. Area, and the two Reception centers. That channel is.
designed to be.used'primarily as a baCK-up Communications link between the facilities if the primary communication linkage is-for some reason unavailable. The second channel.is-assigned'to
.be used by traffic guides. The third channel.is' assigned to the uselof route guides. Route guides are given portable mobile radios to take with them on their assigned buses so_that they can maintain contact with the rest of NHY;ORO. The fourth 1
channel is designated as an overflow channel. 'In theory it is to be used in the event that radio traffic on one or more of the other channels becomes dysfunctional for some reason. The 800-MHz ERN has a designed communication goal of providing 95%
reliabi.lity for communication within the EPZ. A design goal of 95% reliability is is consistent with the design goals of public safety radio communication networks.
III. RADIO COVERAGE In evaluating any radio system, the first consideration i
is the required range that the' system is designed to serve.
The NHY ORO operations have two primary coverage considerations.
The first is the ten mile emergency planning zone. Within a 10
g mile radius of"theLSeabrook facility, portable radio coverage g
]
is required.- This is necessary.to support the field operations ik under the SPMC, During the Graded Exercise FEMAinoted thaty ]
some of the_ route' guides who'were alerting the hearinguimpaired=
within the EPZ' expressed' difficulty in ra'dio' communications i
l with theLStaging Area. . Apparently, in some cases ~ reception.was sporadic. NHY ORO has been unable.to' ascertain why such i reception was. sporadic,'and hence,-nothing appearsJto have-been-done to correct it.- i
'In connection with the SPMC, there is a: secondary requirement for radio coverage. This is coverage beyond the110' I J
mile EPZ. .The ERN system was not designed'toLany. specific' goal {
of reliability outside of the EPZ. There are significant 1 operations under the SPMC involving NHY ORO field workers that occur outside the EPZ. As part of the_ emergency plan, buses are to be used to evacuate transit dependent persons from-the-EPZ. The buses that are to'be used in the SPMC f-or that purpose are dispatched from bus yards fromJthroughout' eastern-Massachusetts. The buses begin their movement to the EPZ from towns outside the EPZ. These towns include Medford, Concord, Groton, Avon, Ashlund, Shrewsbury, and Milbury. Because of the ERN's limited range, buses coming from those towns.as points of origin may not be able to communicate with NHY ORO with any degree of predictability or reliability until they'were within a radius of roughly 15 to 20 miles from [ TOWN]. . J(Because of concerns expressed by the Applicants, the Massachusetts Attorney General has agreed not to disclose the-actual name of the.[ TOWN]. However, for the purposes of clarifying this testimony the identity of the town will be made known to the licensing board in a manner that will take into consideration the Applicants' concerns.)
During the Exercise, FEMA found that as a consequence of this apparent lack of radio range or coverage by the ERN some route guides were out of contact with NHR ORO for up to two hours. Because the ERN was not designed to any degree of reliability for coverage beyond the EPZ, the existing ERN system may not provide communication reliably to buses on their way to the EPZ nor to buses as they transport: transit dependent persons such as school children to host facilities that are located, in many instances, some distance from the EPZ. For example, the SPMC apparently contemplates using Holy Cross l
i College in Worcester as a host. facility for all school children. Communications with buses going to that location i
w: ll be at best unreliable for a considerable period of time.
The problem posed by this ack of coverage is that when the route guides are out of commur2 cation with NHY ORO they potentially will be unable to receive vital pieces of information. For example, during the Exercise several route guides did not receive the instruction to ingest KI. They may similarly be unable to receive other pieces of vital information such as changes to evacuation routes due to a traffic impediment. This could cause considerable confusion in the implementation of a PAR as Route Guides will not know where they were supposed to go to if they are reassigned to a different location than originally planned for and assigned to.
il
Furthermore, when route guides are out of ERN' range, they., j are unable to transmit to NHY.ORO information that may be useful, if not critical to, informing schools and other' persons
- in-special populations as to' appropriate actions to take for the l purposes of. evacuation. For example, during the Graded Exercise after a genera 1' emergency was declared, the school-buses.that normally' serve the Amesbury Public Schools.were-enroute to, if 1
l not' actually at the schools, that;they normally_ provide. transit to. At 3:17, the Amesbury School liaison called and told the; )
schools in Amesbury that NHY ORO would be using its own buses i
. for transit and to release the buses that were already available at the school. That release direction was in part premised on an estimated time of arrival for the NHY buses of 3:55 p.m. In fact'the buses did notistart to. arrive at the schools until.
4:34 p.m., some 40 minutes after the stated E.T.A. and over two hours after.the general emergency was declared. During the Exercise, the last NHY ORO school bus did net arrive at its designated locale until 6:25 which was some four hours after i1 the general emergency was declared.
It is important that NHY ORO be consistently able to communicate to its route guides while they are in transit from I the bus yards to the EpZ in order to ascertain where they are i enroute. If NHY ORO had that capability and used it during the Exorcise, ORO would have_had a more accurate picture to estimate the time of arri,al of the buses in Amesbury. NHY ORO then could make better use of the existing resources and reduce the I risk of an ad hac response. I l- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _
I There appears to be a similar range problem with respect _to' .a
- l coverage for the Emergency Medical System Service as exists for i EPN coverage'. Ambulances used by NHY ORO are supposed to communicate on this system. 'The EMS radio apparently lacksithe j range to allow reliab1'e communication even as far as Boston where some of the host hospitals for the Massachusetts'Ep2'are located. The same kinds of problems-that exist for'the ERN are )
also presented in connection with the EMS. system because again !
1 many of the ambulance companies that are under contract with j 1
NHY ORO are located some distance from the EpZ.
1 IV. COMMUNICATIONS TRAFFIC ]
1 Another concern noted by FEMA that. relates.to the ERN' system is voice traffic overload on the route guide channel. Normally, 1 I
to determine the capacity of a communication system, the 2 requisite message traffic to be handled by the system is analized. Every communication system has a finite average period of time which a user must wait to acces~ the system. As a system becomes more crowded, this wait gets longer. In designing any communication system'and in particular designing a public safety communication system, the maximum allowable waiting period should be determined, and then the type of traffic can be analized to determine if_this period is exceeded.
If excessive access time'is found as a result of the analysis, additional channels should be acquired to relieve the
-congestion.
I' l 1
Apparently no traffic analysis was done in designing the ERN system. Instead, the four channels that comprise the ERN system were selected to correspond to the four user assignments rather than as a result of analycing the capacity of the channels to handle a predicted volume of traffic. An acceptable system access time for public safety communication systems is considered by the U.S. Department of Justice to be 2.5 seconds, in 90% of access attempts. A typical public safety communication system achieves this with a loading capacity of approximately 50 users per channel. Because all route guides are assigned to one channel, and under the SpMC nearly 170 route guides may be separately mobilized and assigned radios, that
)1 results in approximately three times as many users on the route l J
guide channel than is normally acceptable in a public safety communication system.
I l
During the exercise, FEMA noted that an approximately ten minute delay occurred in transmitting information requesting )
I l
dispatch of a wrecker from the transfer point because of heavy bus dispatch traffic on the route guide channel. FEMA also 1
noticed that route guides for the hearing impaired expressed difficulty in radio communications because in some instances the assigned channel was overloaded. While FEMA recommended I
further training to improve radio protocol used by ORO field workers, it is not at all clear that merely improving training will correct the communications traffic overload on the route guide channel because the overload of users on that channel is in excess of three times normally acceptable levels.
l l
w As a method to determine if congestion can be cured on the
' route guide. channel, a traffic study follows which is based'on normally acceptable public safety radio channel use. The assumptions made are:
1 the average message. length per transmission equals 15 seconds;
- 2) one message per user on the route guide.
channel per hour during an. evacuation after the declaration of-a genera 1' emergency.
The basis for system response time evaluation ic )
equations taken from' queuing line theory. For the single' r channel case, and'a single class o'f call',.the average' waiting j time can be est'imated using the following formula:
(a) I
_u_.
I W=u l-a u
1 Where: a- average message arrival rate - 170/3600 u- average message servicing rate - 1/15 Solving-for this equation, we find an average waiting time in excess of 30 seconds to access the channel.
This is 'N significantly greater than the 2.5 se'cond recommendation from Lf- the U.S. Department of Justice.
1 E In order to determine the appropriate number of channels that a radio system should have.in order to handle to the up to 170 ):oute guides, the~following equation is'used:
vr
. ___m.____.-____.m ._ -
j
\
Channel Work Load = (PCR) x (CD) i l
3600 Where: PCR = Peak Calls per Hour = 170 CD = 7"erage Call Duration = 15 l Solving for this equation shows a channel workload equal to 0.708. If 90% of access attempts are successful, this corresponds to 10% maximum blocking rate (unsuccessful attempts). Referring to Figure 2, this traffic load requires approximately 2.2 channels to support the desired system
( availability. At least two channels, preferrably three, should be assigned to route guide usage under this formula, and the 170 potential users in the group should be divided among these channels. These calculations have been made with the assumption of a relatively short average message length of i approximately 15 seconds and one message per user during peak j activity. Should a study show that the average communication per route guide is in excess of 15 seconds, that would increase both the waiting time and the number of channels required.
l
! The obvious problem with having this kind of delay built into the ERN communication system is that vital information cannot be communicated or received in normally acceptable time tolerances for public safety communication networks. It means that beacuse of the ERN's system design delays in communications may well occur. Information about road blockages which can critically back up evacuation routes 1
l
l
.or safety related information concerning the' ingestion of KI I may not be communicated in a timely manner. Having all route-guides. assigned onto one channel results-in.havin',' an already
- limited radio system, where'only four persons can talk at.once, reduced down to an even more. truncated system.
V. PROCEDURES-While NHY ORO has proposed certain procedures.that.are ,
, (
meant to alleviate some of the channel congestion, it is not clear that those procedures will be-adequate:to deal with the ;
channel loading problem for route guides. For example, ERN-1 . . k users are supposed to be trained to assign one of three levels ~
of priority to each transmission: Emergency; priority; and Routine. The assignment of level of priority is at the users descretion. However, if a route guide is transmitting, the channel is tied up until-he is through, and no emergency 1 l
l message can be sent by any other user on that channel even though.it has a higher priority. status. Therefore, even if a-route guide has an emergency level transmission, he will not be able to gain access to the channel until another route guide is a through transmitting. While ERN users are'given certain j guidelines as to what constitutes a routine as' opposed to an emergencyLmessage, ultimately, the decision as.to the priority l 1evel of a message is in their hands.
Another procedure that NHY ORO is planning to implement in connection with the ERN system is designed to circumvent the deficiency resulting from the lack of radio coverage range. Under this proposed procedure, radio l _-__ -__
~
b, ! t
'e dispatchers will go through a roll call of all~ERN channeli users when a piece of information application'to'all users on a.
channel is transmitted to them. For example',<with' respect'to instructions to ingest KI, the proposed procedure would call for the dispatcher to'go through a rollcall of all' route guides to make'sure'that they had the received the message.
The ro11 call procedures would' theoretically enable NHY ORO-to ascertain whether all-routeyguides received the KI
' instruction or whether.some'did not because they were'out of.
range. The problem with.this procedure being implemented.to
~
circumvent the range coverage deficiency in the ERN is that it exacerbates-the channel overload that existsfon the route guide channel. The rollcall procedure puts an additional overload.
burden on the ERN because it calls for the dispatcher to put.
out an additional 150 + messages. The dispatcher must then wait for and confirm receipt back an additional 150 +
messages. Even if each communication takes only 10 seconds, that results in the route guide channel being in use for approximately 50 minutes simply to make sure that'every route guide received the original communication. If.for some reason l a route guide is out of range:and does not receive the original 1
transmiss' ion as confirmed by the rolicall> procedure, the transmission and ro11 call are to be repeated until all route gitides acknowledge that they have. received the original transmission. In sum, the proposed procedure'to circumvent the range coverage limitations of the ERN will serve to burden an already strained system potentially causing significant channel overload problems in the ERN.
L_- _ _ . _ _ - _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ . _ -
l The current procedures in place for communications between field workers appear to preclude a rapid communication of information directly to other field workers, such as from one traffic guide to another. While there is a capability through the ERN for one traffic guide to talk directly to anotter, the SPMC procedures are written to direct communications to take place in a vertical manner with respect to the NHY ORO rather than directly from field worker to field _
worker.
For example, under the SpMC traffic guides are to report road impediments to the evacuation support dispatcher.
The evacuation support dispatcher in turn reports impediments to the staging area leader. The Staging Area Leader in turn notifies a transfer point dispatcher. The transfer point dispatcher then notifies and dispatches an appropriate road crew to remove the impediment. If an evacuation route is blocked, the staging area leader must then advise the Evacuation Support Coordinator at the EOC so that the public can be notified of the evacuation route blockage er.d a decision made on where to re-route. Once the re-route is given, it is then transmitted back down the line to an upstream traffic guide to implement the re-route. There appears to be no provision to talk directly to an upstream traffic guide and advise the guide of the impediment and the need to re-route traffic. It also appears that one is precluded from directly advising the transfer point dispatcher to send out a wrecker.
During the Exercise, this cumbersome procedure apparently
.The current procedures'in place for communications between field workers appear to preclude a rapid communication of information directly to other field-workers, such as'from one traffic guide to another. While there is a capability i
through the ERN for one traffic' guide to talk directly to j another,'the SpMC procedures are written _t.o direct communications to'take place in a vertical manner with respect to the NHY ORO.rather than directly from field worker t'o field' worker.
For example, under the SpMC traffic guides are to report road impediments.to the evacuation support dispatcher.
The evacuation support dispatcher in turn reports impediments to the staging area leader. The Staging Area Leader in turn notifies a transfer point dispatcher. The transfer point i
dispatcher then notifies and dispatches an-appropriate road j crew to remove the impediment. If an evacuation route is i
blocked, the staging area leader must then advise the Evacuation Support Coordinator at the EOC so that the public can be notified of the evacuation route blockage and a decision made on where to re-route. Once the re-route is given, it is then transmitted back down the line to an upstream traffic guide to implement the re-route. There appears to be no provision to talk directly to an. upstream traffic guide and 1
advise the guide of.the impediment and the need to re-route traffic. It also appears that one is precluded from directly advising the transfer point dispatcher to send out a wrecker.
During the Exercise, this cumbersome procedure apparently l
resulted in a simulated accident-that took place at approximately 4:45 p.m. notfbeing removed by a wrecker.for:over a 2'1/2 hours after the accidentLoccurred. In the.one simulated I
road' impediment contained'into.thesFEMA Graded Exercise the.
li actual, clearance of the vehicle did not take place until 7:30l l
p.m.. .Apparently this delay was a result'of'the commanded procedure in the SPMC which precludes aJrapid communication from' field workers such as traffic guides ~or route guides to 1 each other. Thus.apparently, a rapid responseLto emergencies' i
by New Hampshire Yankee'ORO'is precluded by.the.SPMC's own.
procedures. .Having the technical' capability to transmit !
information laterally through'the ERN comes to naught because I the procedures in the SPMC are. inadequate to effectuate that' j
transmittal.
i i
I 1
i
.I i
l 1
-- __-_-___m
ATTACHMENT'l Cunt, sqmIEAr I.
Security Clearance TOP SECRET - DISCO atucation: BSEE, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL,1950 MSEE, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL, 1952 Additional PhD Graduate work (32 hours3.703704e-4 days <br />0.00889 hours <br />5.291005e-5 weeks <br />1.2176e-5 months <br />) at IIT, Chicago, IL, 1952-1958 Affiliations: Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Senior Member Associated Public-Safety Communications Officers Sigma Xi Eta Kappa Nu Tau Beta Pi Armed Forces Consuunications Electronics Association Chairman, IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility copenittee (27) 1961-1963 Member, IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility Coontittee (27) 1959-Present Member, various National Electronics Conference Committees and on the Board of Directors, 1952-7,962 Chairman, Fourth, rifth and Sixth Annual Tri-Service Radio i Interference Reduction Conferences sponsored by the Department of Defense IEEE Representative to ANSI Committee C63, Radio Electronic Coordination i Member, IRE Standards casuilttee, 1960-1962 Chairman, Fourth Annual Joint Military Industrial Electronic Test Equipments Syngosia Member, !oint Technical Advisory Cossaittee (JTAC) subcommittee on Electromagnetic Compatibility (63.1) and Chairman of Group on Analysis Techniques (63.1.3)
Liaison Member of JrAC Subconnaittee 71.1 on Radio Noise Chairman, Second and Third National Symposia on Law Enforcement Sciones and technology Erperience summary:
Over thirty-six (36) years of experience in the management and performance of natitidiscipline programs involving management systems, policy formulation, economics, social science, statistics, telecommunications engineering, engineering analysis, mathematical modeling, data base design and management, and computer simulation; specialization in the fields of program management, teleconsonication and spectrum management, electromagnetic ccupatibility analysis, fiber optics applications telecommunications and information systems, radio wave propagation, radio interference, radar, and electronics research and development. Major responsibility for establishing management and operating electromagnetic compatibility analysis capabilit bases for DoD sad Federal Spectrum Mhnagement Authorities.y and data
_ - _ _ _ _ - _ - ~
00fti, hrmMLEY I. (CDfrINUED)
Professional Experience:
1982 - Present Sachs/ Freeman Associates, Inc., Landover, MD ,
Senior Vice President, Telecommunications and Information {
Sciences. Overall management responsibility for three departments concerned with systems engineering, computer system and public safety systems as well as for multidiscipline programs involving analytical and evaluation studies concerned with long-range planning, management systems, telecommunication management, spectrum management,-
EMC systems engineering, data base design and management, ADP management, management information systems, and office automation. Provides technical guidance to the Navy on national and international spectrum management. Responsible for the supervision of cellular, paging, and mobile radio design and licensing projects. Has participated and provided technical guidance for evaluation of narrowband technologies for land-mobile use, long range spectrum planning for the FCC and NrIA, and in many telecommunications projects for federal, state and local government and commercial clients.
1978 - 1982 National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) US Department of Casanerce Held several executive positions at Nf1A. As Deputy Administrator for operations, was responsible for the overall day-to-day operation of the agency and was first line supervisor of all line and staff office heads. Had direct responsibility for planning, resource allocation and management, budget justification, fiscal. management, personnel management, ensuring work quantity and quality and advising the Assistant secretary (Administrator NrIA) on policy and management matters. Was responsible for evaluatlng and providi perio executive direction for all 23 Nf!A programs by an interdisciplinary staff of over 400 engineers, physical scientists, computer analysts, attorneys, econcaists and social scientists. The programs concerned recommending policies for telecommunications and information (TEI) industries, R&D for improvin telecommunication resources,g andTGI providing systems, managing public telecommunications facilities.
As Associate Administrator was responsible for managing NTIA's pr rams and staff of the office of hleconsunications ications concerned with more effective use of te communications and information technologies. This involved identifying user needs, evaluating new technology applications, such as satellites and fiber optics, developing methods to serve the needs, working with various Federal agencies to implement more efficient ud effective systems, removing' regulatory barriers impeding introduction of
CCHN, EMELET I. (0:NTIMJED)
Professional Experience (Continued) new technologies, conducting or coordinating experimental a:xi pilot tests, and managing grant programs for Public Services i
satellite use and Public Teleconnunications Fccilities.
As Deputy Associate Administrator was responsible for the internal management of the office of Federal Systems and Spectrum Management which has the responsibility for managing the rederal use of the radio spectrun, chairing the Inter-department Radio Advisory Conmittee, developing long-range plans in conjunction with the FCC for overall national spectrum managem nt, developing rederal positions and coordinating national positions for international spectrum matters, planning rederal teleconnunications systems and telecommunications protection. Projects involved studies, evaluations and policy formulations concerning procurement, management and operation of federal systems; spectrum allocation and assignment in the federal, national and international sectors; and telectamunications protection. Was directly responsible to the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications for direction and overseeing the program managers for three programs, and coordination of the Management of Teleconnunications Resources Budget Activity, and the Spectrun Management and Planning Budget Subactivity.
1971 - 1978 0'.'fice of Telecommunications (OT), US Department of Commerce As Chief, Spectrum Management Support Division, was responsible for the management of the activities of the division and served as the Entity Program Manager (Spectrum Management! Support). In the latter capacity, directed the program in the Office of Telecommunications concerned with the present and future management of the radio spectrum. This program supported the office of Teleconsunications Policy, Executive office of the President. Responsibilities included the following program elements: Spectrum Management and Information Element which provided the day-to-day frequency management support, computer support and software development; spectrum Analysis Element which analyzed the use of the spectrum resource from an electromagnetic cespatibility standpoint and reviewed new radio systems for provision of spectrum support; and, the Spectrum Engineering Development Element which developed analysis techniques and provided measurement support.
While performing regular duties, Mr. Cohn also served as Acting Chief, Analytical Support Division for 15 months and as acting Deputy Director, Office of Telecommunications for seven months.
As Acting Chief Analytical Support Division, was responsible for the management of the Analytical Support Division which
4 00EN, IMLEY I. (C3rrI!MD)
Professional Experience (Continued provided policy analysis support to the Office of Teleconnunications Policy, Executive Office of the President.
his division performed analysis of various issues in the federal government and international policy areas.
Recommended policies and policy options concerning procurement and management of federal systems and internatiorni issues.
Evaluated federal research and development including the initiation, improvement, expansion, testing, operation and the use of the federal telecommunications systems and programs.
As Acting Deputy Director, aided the Director /OF in the management of the office and assumed the Director's duties in his absence. Se office had three major program areas. Wese wre: Improvement of Telecommunications (Direct and Other
/M funded), Spectrum Management Support to the OTP and Policy Analysis Support to the OTP. In addition to aiding in directing these technical activities, this assignment also involved supervising the administrative and public information functions of the office.
1951 - 1971 IIT Research Institute (formerly Armour Research roundation)
Chicago, IL and Annapolis, MD -
Held various management and technical positions. As Director of Research, directed the Systems Science Research Division (East Coast operations). Activities included supervision of a staff of over 300 persons engaged in electronics, electromagnetic compatibility analysis, engineering mechanics, law enforcement science & technology, operations research, physics and social sciences research and development.
As Associate Director of Research, Electronics Division was responsible for the Technical Operations of the Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center (ECAC),
Annapolis, MD with a staff of 260 persons providing contract services to the D00 in the rmC/ Radio Frequency Interference field. runctioned as ECAc's Director of Technical operations.
As Assistant Director of Research, Electronics Division, Chicago, IL was responsible for the operation of six sections concerned with communications, radar, radio frequency interference, microwaves, instrumentation, recording and computer systems.
As supervisor, communications & Radar Section, Electronics Division supervised a staff of engineers conducting research projects on various communications and radar projects.
As member of technical staff, Electronics Division, Communications & Radar Section. Conducted research and development activities in projects involving various electronic systems. Project Engineer en a variety of projects.
v-I e.
. l 000st, STJNEY I. (CINfDMD)
Publications:
OMNIDIRECTICNAL COAXIAL SIOT ANTE!@dA ARRAY, IRE National Convent 1953, also the National Electronics C_onference, 1954.
DESIGN & DE'EIOPMENT OF A STANDARD WHITE NOISE GENE INSnUMENT, ,*o-authored with H. Zucker, Y. Baskin. of IITRI, and A. Rosenbloom and I.
1958. Lerner of USARDL, Ft. Monmouth, NJ, . IRE Transaction of Instrumen of the 1959 National Aeronautical Electronics Conferenc with R. Arndt, J. Krstensky and H. Sachs, Proceedings of Electronics Conf., 1959.
A MULTIPLE PROSE METHOD OF NE MEASUREMENT OF REFLEC IN A COAXIAL NAVEGUIDE, Co-authored with C.M. Knop, Proceedings of the 6th !
l Conf. on Radio Interference Reduction and Electronic Compatibility, Oct.,
1960, also the Proceedings of the National Electronics Conf.,1960. )
i ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, Frontier, Fall,1961.
WE TECHNICAL PROGRAM AT ME ANALYSIS CENTER, Proceedings of the 7th Conference 1961. on Radio Interference Reduction and Electronic Compatibility, Nov.
ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, The Speaker, IEEE, May 1962.
TECHNICAL PROGRESS AT ME ANALYSIS CENTER, Proceedings of the 8th Tri-Ser of NAECON, May 1963. Conf. on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Oct.,1962 WE DEPARMENT Lecture OF DEFENSE ELECTRCHAG4 ETIC 0@lPATIBILITY ANALYSIS Series, Aug.1965.
AN OPEMTIG4 March, 1966. ALLY ORIENIED PERFORMANCE CONTROL MODEL, IEEE Interna AN APPRQhCH 'IC C0f9EMICATIONS COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS, Digest of 1966 IEEE International Commaanications Conference, June, 1966.
EMC - A SYSTEMS SCIENCE, Keynote Address, 1967, IEEE Electromagnetic compatibility Synposium, July,1967.
ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY - A NECESSITY ICR HIQ54AY Col 0EMICATIONS, Highway Research Record, Jan. 1968.
SPECIRUM ENGINEERING
'INE REY 'ID PROGRESS, Co-authored with R. Gifford, et al, Joint Technical Advisory Committee (JTAC), March, 1968.
v 3
CGIN, h'INEEY I. (CCIffINUED)
Publicatiana (Continued):
LAW 1NFORCDENr. SCIENCE 6 MCHN014GY II, Jan.,1969, Edited by S.I. Cohn i'
IAW ENFORCDENT SCIENCE & TECHNotoGY III, Dec.,1970, Edited by S.I. Cohn and W. McMahon.
M& LYSIS TECHNIQUES FOR SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT, Delivered During EUR000N,1971 on Oct. 20, 1971.
SPECTRLM MANAGEMDrr SUPPORT PROGRAM - AN OVERVIEW, IEEE DiC International' Symposium Record,' July, 1972.
WE FEDERAL GOVEle8ENT'S SPECTRUM MANAGDENT PROGRAM - AN OVERVIEN, co-authored with W. Dean, Jr., IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility Symposium Record, July, 1974.
l THE Cfr SPECTRLM MANAGDENT SUPPORT PROGRAM--AN OVERVIEN, IEEE EMC Transactions Special Issue on Spectrum Management, Aug., 1977.
TIN YEARS OF PROGRESS IN 911, Keynote Address, National 911 Conference, June, 1981.
COLLECTION AND DEVELOPMDrr OF INFORMATION '!O SUPPORT LONG-RANGE SPECTRLM
, PLAmING, Final Report Contract #wr-81-SAC-00072, Aug.,1982. !
EVALUATION OF IMPROVED SPECTRUM ITTILIZATICH CCNCEPTS, Final _ Report Contract
- NT-82-RAC-26010, Feb., 1983.
. EVALUATION OF THE USE OF NEW NARRONRAND TECHNOLOGIES IN 'INE EXISTING PRIVATE LAND MOSILE RADIO FREQUENCY ALIDCATICH, Final Report for Land Mobile Communications Council, Aug.,1984. Co-authored with E.R. Freeman.
ME'INODOCDGY FOR DETERMINING SPECTRIM EFFICIENCY, Final Report Contract 43 SANT 503717, Aug., 1985.
ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS FOR COORDINATION OF ME HIGI9EY MAINTENANCE RADIO SERVICE, I Final Report for American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officiale, June, 1986.
LAIC NOBILE NARROMBAND TECHN0I4GIES, EMC TECHNotoGY, September october,1986.-
co-authored with Jerry Wacker. .,
1
l i lf qF .
UH I
F _
O E
Z G P N _
E .
A _
e R _
l _
i _
M _
?,' \
(
0
%S c 3 ti 1 'e #
- O . _
r 5k ht e
- l a t e, t _
..=
r e
f o* '
~ iw
'(S t
. 'h h
c n
N h' a
a
. [ -
teCo< 5 a, _
- Qt M? .m m.e= .f M.
, 3, .
' , d s ' . g _
a e sa . P h
e ', - * .
k s hc - a P t e y , ' a o r A m [pJ.* ~ l br e ^
xt .N- n a
~'a .
u v o
'o. g= '"'Nl5'd'f,e- P w
,bN'*
, u
<IY a h u ,#, , N '
N E W ~, Wrg tvj H ei t
,k a " " h
- 's
..i c 4 e *
- e s F a
(, 2 od g > +-
io u , 50 t e v
"a m e.
.r 8 t H i 's, p"
- a. ba s, b*. ' * , m J c tp [. h n
a " - .
.k- .Htua"s
' * - a, u a s i m '.k e e S
. , N' ,
- r. -
h - " p ha e ht i.
t
.o 3
a "**s =c _
wg.gu y ,, m '* . N u / E s , e'N
- e . .
- g.,
3
's / ,
. s
,5f Y S*
w
,p
? * ?f gs '. gom w -
,=WR
'v _
,. -.o
., d t y T e;
..3 s s p ,
8
' ten o .
s e l e
o - _
,'n.-l N e%*** . -'W r
a jW T 2
-- n / . h e . - tyl ,"d ry . ,
-* t 8, t' w
. < ook' u u /n.taw w' . , ,
'd .s L t * .
.lo b'
' 2 ,
N A #=-
b
- W *" .ST O s"M . "'*3 sH t .
n- i*d.
,, , y'
- 4,=. ,
m-A *-
N e,'i e,
d x d , "7 9 3 =
s a
u 208 "
g 8' n@'
a a 5 i , r
- e
~
' s
's hr a'/'c d ,
, e a*
r e'u...e
' Zis rv s o
o s
e Mi f g
@. i 5,
)
,N .5[
g' a
3 I
g 3
k,D j 3 1
g ,e
= a.. v o dd.
M- * . 2 _
a g nl eg .
- i. .
> ' l'rl ". ..
~d n , , ,' iQ L
q nmla u s
% " c.hA I
oa h Md . m gd ' a ,m s. h. '- 5 o -
3,,
b
>[ ._.),U .. .
- t g<.,. , - ro . 4 ,n ,
i* r,P d e . ' , e C** O 8',E u ,mg a O*
o N ;. . .
- ng n 'r
. *
- g , .
2 i 6
t e
.,- e ," 2
- e t
, d e , t r
. w o
.M n -
,c n j
~
r* s sgea ,e . e - %r
- a w'~ p
. ~
te h+ Y ,' ". ew
. I.1 . 2 -
a - .
eC go<
o 8
Y a nt a^ = ' "
+ r n.
'2 " g 3 att ,M.A - #>
, 1 .
e_ "
2
- , ~ /
h r
a y - .q S
gu
. "+ a
}
a -
y ,
" n tg 3
2 ."
2 h
2 s
e o
p -
' p, s ec t o e -
b i cle r
- 's
_n s
e n , dW la ' -
eW
- a 2 .
_s a
'h a W tee . ,' a Qi , i .
d d 2 " a- - - g r
- o. " lo-. .
l l
fr= ' ' de ,2 "g,P t 3 gf c- _. e r e , = ' .'M g ,o g . W .' $b_n -
n v
o o
_ < c . to d O D
, *
- s n - .p4 p W*l oir (3 2
,p s.c e a -
I m
' 3 g
,, .* .s s
- t. n y ht a c (p , ,
- , s* s ys ao E s e . W C '= . e . w m.
N .
Imd ~
s n
8
, o ,
e c i
g n
. 2
.* i i g
g d
e*
n." I g" r
O S , .
hf o r
g
,,' s. ta*i e
. M Z D ,,. .e m m' e G
R A ,
. d le n 's C
. r r 3 1
Wcn, C
o h 's
'2 * ',
5
'= "
r,t a
F ,,sm emea. '
ts s
tsw e
y a
d E N Y g, r av ,"
a o n
ta y
- oe - -
We E s r '
'. o i. M .
K N
I N
N S
U hf s e m
ra e
- A gtg' g 4.ct S A a N b
d u
u
. e
-a
". ~n o
e' ey yd A u ,
A B w aa r le S -. os hgu g
u t
n d.
Y L ,- Mn 2 #, da.*** o o=o .,k ,i A ,., ,*
- a
_h
- fIf
. A . r le P E ,- a,~ 8 n
- o o b'
s rdv
,p
.o a"-
E T 1 .
- e,
" <*. I C
e h' fH '
I
. , /
low R b Y A
- y
]A ts h,.-
s o le .
F".
- u. , G nos tn I C C e .
. 'A i
_' o r
a p;.
e_
H N I r s . *
, S t
, M .
- s S E D u , o. 3m ' , (d u . ,
- pl od a
G g ,
H P
M R I N
i _ ~
=
a r
ey M *~" */ s
- n u
- H se -
. a
- ? k.7e y b e A E F
- g"'8
,.. . .i w e s.
i l M E
S E
- A'.
- 2 L. , .'
p *L *
{- sq.%h ,
g-
- u. '. 2 hnd.
ga W L ,3 .- m t, s
h' ,
p, " 3 2 .
s '
ho. ^
t r
o ba o r
_[Utp trbn o
n" ayr E E G .,**, ," e
- es s '=
- a i
,., , e N L N - .
- y * , s to i
I M T A
w , , a*
s"*
s s
8 6
. n t
o fa G
r e ,a
,a C
,,M*"d ;, i e '
e*
w ta .s h. s. t 7.,Nr $- F**
=
t e- s. a 0 E .*
t s 7 i* ' r
+g G ._ .
1 R ,
, gac et .
s fy s h s- r
- , ,a n n s e
- a
== )h m
i 5 L a o n.
g
, .~" e .
t i
l n
w [* n 'E N , " . i
.aWh s
- M , lue 2 SaL r te n o " , I
.9 I
" * ?a? , ,
- 7 .S4Q t s .
% f I'
e W.', ,
s
- , 'R
\ -
3
's 8
" m ,2, 0.,', ,o,n** , E /tt 5 5 d
_ I l ll!(lj- ll
FIGURE 2 s
.)
l C = NUMBER OF CHANNELS 300 , 1 , .j s -m --
- _ _ u 7
i I /
/k%33Y$35$
/ /Mf/C/WR a ,, / y/ w / / / /
t , iI, 11 7/
/ / /// / ///:
/ '
/ b //
// / f/ //bV/
, / / /
V
- .,,i 0
! ./ // / /// ///fW 2 3 7 V
)
1 A S 6 S 9 10 UNII$ Of WORK LOAD I
Figure 2. Channel Design Curves l
l 1
l 1
.i e