The officer walks back to the patrol car to see what information has come back from the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) system operated by the FBI and linked to all state law enforcement agencies. The message on the officer's Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) does not list the car as stolen. Still suspicious, the officer requests that the driver come to her car where he places his right finger on a fingerprint scanning device.
NCIC performs a search of its fingerprint files and the officer learns that the driver stole the car he was driving to flee from a robbery he committed a few hours before. He was apprehended before the car's owner knew it had been stolen!
If the same scenario occurred today, the officer would not have had the ability to obtain a picture and the suspect could have gone free.
This story helps illustrate the differences between the current NCIC and NCIC 2000, which will be implemented beginning about a year from now.
NCIC Growing Old
The FBI has operated NCIC since January 1967. Since that time, state, local and federal law enforcement personnel have accessed NCIC hundreds of millions of times. The system is responsible for the recovery of billions of dollars of property. Tens of thousands of criminals have been apprehended and thousands of missing juveniles and adults have been found through the use of NCIC. While it provides an invaluable service to law enforcement agencies in the U.S., NCIC has grown old.
While hardware has been replaced and features have been added to the old system, NCIC was developed in first and second generation computer languages and sorely needs replacing. To that end, the FBI began a project in 1986 to replace NCIC with NCIC 2000. After much planning, and the development of pilot programs to demonstrate the imaging and fingerprint capabilities of a new system, a $46 million contract to develop NCIC 2000 was awarded to Harris Corp. of Melbourne, Fla., in March 1993.
While the primary impetus for NCIC 2000 was the need to upgrade the technology of the current system, the FBI was also planning to enhance NCIC to increase its usefulness to the law enforcement community. According to Roy Weise, chief of the Systems Transition Unit of the Program Development Section of the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services Division, NCIC 2000 will provide a new lifecycle for the system.
NCIC has been using code originally written in the late 1960s, an IBM 2780 communications protocol from the same time period, and a flat file, rather than a relational database. System enhancements will include:
+ New hardware and software.
+ Image capability for pictures of subjects, stolen property and fingerprint matching.
+ A choice of communications protocols, including TCP/IP and SNA, and a move to open systems.
+ A move from the current 9.6 KB communications circuits to 56 KB.
+ Electronic validation of records submitted by state and local law enforcement agencies.
+ Electronic access to Federal Bureau of Prisons records as well as improved access to Canadian criminal justice records.
+ The ability to multi-thread queries (process multiple transactions simultaneously), which are currently processed one at a time.
+ Response times will improve slightly, although the improvement should not be noticeable to the user. The mandated response time once the FBI receives the query is two seconds, but the current basic inquiry response time takes less than that.
+ Improved security, using encryption.
+ Linking of records across files and a new name search system based on the New York State Intelligence and Identification System (NYSIIS).
+ Live scan fingerprint capability.
In order to take advantage of NCIC 2000, state and local law enforcement communications networks will need upgrading, patrol cars will need to implement MDTs and existing dumb terminals will need to be replaced with PCs to provide for imaging applications.
The Transition to NCIC 2000
The transition to NCIC 2000 will take three years from the planned implementation by the FBI, which will begin in 1996. To ease that transition for state and local governments, law enforcement agencies can continue to use current communications protocols through the implementation period. The FBI has a long history of working closely with state and local law enforcement agencies on NCIC so the upgrades necessary to implement NCIC 2000 have been known for some time. Each state has a NCIC Control Officer who serves as the state liaison to the FBI on matters relating to NCIC. States have kept abreast of proposed changes in NCIC and have included the needs of an upgraded NCIC in their systems planning process.
PENNSYLVANIA
Pennsylvania, for example, will need to upgrade its message switches in anticipation of NCIC 2000. The commonwealth contracts with Unisys to provide the switching, and the upgrade will require new software, an easy task under its current contract, according to Lt. Michael Weir of the Pennsylvania State Police. The implementation of MDTs in patrol cars and the other improvements necessary to take advantage of NCIC 2000 is a different matter. With over 600 criminal justice agencies in the state and a large geographic area to police, the adoption of MDTs would be a major undertaking.
Currently, the state is implementing an 800 MHz digital communications system to upgrade its current VHF system. While 800 MHz is not absolutely necessary for NCIC 2000, there are other reasons to make the switch, according to Ron Wilt of the State Police. These include interference-free transmission and reception, additional trunking capabilities and the fact that the communications industry is moving to 800 MHz. With the recent election of a new governor in Pennsylvania, a new commissioner for the state police will be appointed, so final decisions will await his or her arrival. In spite of the changes that are necessary to take advantage of the new system, Lt. Weir said that "the users are excited about NCIC 2000." He believes that the state is in a good position to take advantage of the new technology.
NEW HAMPSHIRE
New Hampshire, in anticipation of NCIC 2000, upgraded its message switch about four years ago. According to Major Fredrick Booth, the support services commander for the New Hampshire State Police, the next issue is replacing the dumb terminals with intelligent PC workstations that can handle imaging. The original specifications for the terminals was a 80386-based IBM-compatible microcomputer with 4 MB RAM and a 120 MB hard disk. The latest specifications recommend a 66 MHz 486 with 8 MB of RAM and a 140 MB hard disk, so any states that may have already purchased the PCs may be facing another upgrade. The cost of the add-in board to handle the compression and decompression of data will cost an additional $2,500 per computer, a cost some agencies feel is excessive. Major Booth said that states in his region asked if there was a software solution for decompression and compression that could take the place of the card at less cost. Another issue related to the implementation and the cost is whether states choose to use MDTs or laptop computers that serve as MDTs. Laptop computers are more versatile than MDTs and can be used for additional functions, such as report writing.
Iowa
Iowa is considering the implementation of MDTs in patrol cars as it plans the move to NCIC 2000. The state is not currently planning to transmit fingerprints, however. Their current automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS) is old and will need replacing in the near future.
The state currently uses a high band system for communications and is not looking to move to an 800 MHz communications system. According to Gary Stevens, communications technical manager for the Iowa State Patrol, Iowa is a rural state with less than 3 million people and a land area the size of Michigan, so upgrading to a 800 MHz communications system would be very costly. In contrast, Michigan, with 12 million people, is spending $187 million for a statewide 800 MHz radio system.
Iowa does have one important part of the infrastructure necessary to implement NCIC 2000 in place, however, the Iowa Data Network. The data network provides a fiber-optic backbone to every county in the state, which will allow local law enforcement agencies to easily connect to the new system.
Carroll Bidler, director of the Administrative Services Division for the Iowa Department of Public Safety and NCIC Control Officer, noted that the state is installing a new communications network under TCP/IP using Frame Relay. According to Bidler, two local police agencies, Iowa City and Davenport, currently have MDTs. In addition, the state has been upgrading its message switches. He thinks the system can handle the normal requests and imaging applications that will come with NCIC 2000. The compression and decompression of those images is still a question that the state will need to answer.
Upgrades at what cost?
In terms of the costs of the upgrades necessary to move to NCIC 2000, many of the requirements of the new system are no more than the police agencies would be undertaking on their own in the next five years. Many states have included the upgrades in their regular maintenance and upgrade cycles. This helps keep the additional costs to a minimum. Iowa, for example will incur some additional costs as it runs parallel systems during the implementation of the new system, but once the system is switched over, their operational costs should remain very close to what they are now, in the neighborhood of $5 million per year.
The requirement to move away from dumb terminals will require that local government law enforcement agencies replace their dumb terminals with PCs. While many local law enforcement agencies were moving in that direction anyway, NCIC 2000 will require the local law enforcement community to automate a little sooner than they might have otherwise.
In conclusion, the upcoming implementation of NCIC 2000 has states working to implement the upgraded technology necessary to take advantage of the system's enhancements. Improvements in communications, message switching, intelligent workstations, MDTs or laptop computers in patrol cars will require additional spending by state and local government law enforcement agencies. These agencies seem to have planned well for the new system, implementing the new technologies and capabilities as time, training and budget allows.
