[BC] RE: EAS

[Tom Taggart]

The heart of the government's plan for emergency alerting is NWS, or "all  
hazards" radio. Problem is that the governmnet does not want to put any  
money into what is essentially a primitive narrow-band system designed to  
alert boaters.

There aren't enough channels to provide for effective coverage of  
different regions.  So we have a network of low-powered transmitters that  
often do not provide coverage of metropolitan areas, while interferring  
with each other.

So the broadcasters are drafted to provide a transmission system that will  
actually reach the public.

The problem is now that the government will not provide adequate funding  
for this "all hazards radio." Leaving the operation to the NWS staff, who  
may or may not understand how the system works.

Unfortunately, I fully expect the result of the pending EAS inquiry by the  
FCC to result in the usual bureaucratic solution to any problem:  more  
rules mandating relay of the emergency messages.  Whether or not they mean  
anything, as in the case of NWS Pittsburgh, who insist on sending  
messaages consisting solely of header and eom (no voice message.

(Yes they have been told they have a problem.  yes the system has been  
explained to them--by a fellow from the Charleston NWS office.  No, they  
really don't give a damm.)

Until I see a real effort on the part of the government to build up staff  
and transmission system for their system, I see no margin in cooperating  
with these people.  We are merely the fall guys when their system fails.
-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/