[BC] KWVE and the NAL

[Warren Shulz]

Nothing in IL area at this time Our IBA CEO is on alert and aware of the
KWVE event.  It may have not registered, may go unnoticed or it's too
complicated to understand the risk.  

SECC list was active with discussion and I suspect broadcast
associations and SECC chairs may file unsolicited letters of comment to
the Commission. 
 
What concerns me was the 'willful' statement in the NAL for what appears
to be a human error not sending the EOM.  From what was reported, "this
is a test' did make it to air.  The EOM did not.  In this particular
installation the EAS unit was at a console input.  Input or program
channel (after console) the result would be the same if the EOM was not
transmitted.   

In this case the LP was originating an RMT as planned.  It was
triggering a cable system that caused a citizen to file a compliant.
Interrupted until the cable EAS unit time out playing  station's normal
programming.  Only thing they could have done was resent the RMT or send
a RWT to clear it if the operator realized the EOM didn't make it to air
and reacted immediately.  That is a lot of if's.  Operator may not have
realized the EOM did not make it to air.  Apparently, the cable system
EAS unit timed out and cable audio was restored.  The FCC reaction
apparently was from one cable viewer' compliant.

Lesson learned is let the government agency do the RMT.  Not saying IL
is right but we have state EOC create and send the Monthly test to all
LP stations over the state Emergency two-way  state-wide system.  It
works consistently time after time.  The less twist in the EAS road the
less that can go wrong.  And as we all know if it can go wrong it will
at one time or another.  I don't think the FCC could fine the State of
Illinois EOC for an error.  If the channel stayed open for 2 minutes the
LP audio could make it into an operational area.  With 12 years of RMT
(144 RMT's) testing (in Illinois) to draw on I have no evidence that
ever occurred.  But the risk is their.  By design the RMT would timeout
and restore audio.  Only the EAN code has no timeout.

>From some time ago here's a dialog about EAS and volunteers...

	Federal Communications Commission	FCC 01-88 DISSENTING
STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER HAROLD W. FURCHTGOTT-ROTH

Amendment of Part 11 of the Commission's Rules Regarding the Emergency
Alert System, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking

The current Emergency Alert System (EAS) provides a valuable service to
the American public. Its usefulness has been demonstrated in countless
situations where the public has been notified of impending emergencies
and has been informed of the details as those emergencies develop.
Current EAS rules are grounded both in law and good practice. The Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking ("NPRM") suggests new EAS rules, some voluntary,
others not. The new rules would not be as clearly grounded in law, nor
would they necessarily reflect sound policy. For these reasons, I
dissent.

I am particularly troubled about the adoption of voluntary rules in all
instances. How are such rules applied and enforced? What meaning do they
have? If the law requires a regulated entity to provide a certain
service, that service cannot be voluntary. Conversely, the agency should
not suggest voluntary compliance with rules that have little or no
statutory basis.

Specifically, the NPRM suggests additional warning rules for state and
local emergencies without adequately exploring the effect such rules,
albeit proposed as voluntary, may have on broadcasters and cable
operators. For example, while questions are raised as to the costs of
providing such warnings, the NPRM does not recognize or consider the
fact that local franchising authorities may require cable operators to
issue local emergency warnings as a condition of a franchise
renewal-thus, turning a voluntary action into a mandatory requirement at
the local level. The NPRM also considers additional rules for alerting
persons with disabilities, yet does not examine whether the rules in
place adequately address the concerns raised. It is important to note
that these suggested proposals, and others like them in the item, are
proffered for consideration even before the original EAS requirements
have been completely implemented by some of the affected entities. 7

In sum, the Commission should have issued a Notice of Inquiry that
reflects upon the current state of EAS. After such an inquiry, if it
were found that additional policies were necessary to fix the current
system consistent with the law, or that other communications services
need to be included to better effectuate the goal of alerting the public
to dangers, then the Commission 
would be on firmer ground to go forward.



-----Original Message-----
From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net
[mailto:broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Barry Mishkind
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 10:48 AM
To: broadcast at radiolists.net
Subject: [BC] KWVE and the NAL



Now that most of you have had a chance to digest the issuance of a
$5000 fine for a botched EAS test, have any of you heard of reaction
from management/ownership to withdraw from LP-1 and LP-2 status?



- - -
The Broadcasters' Desktop Resource

<http://www.theBDR.net>www.theBDR.net
Please take a look
Please pass it on....



~______________________________________________________________________~
The Broadcast [BC] list is sponsored by www.SystemsStore.com
Your Premium Supplier Of Components To Build and Maintain A Technical
Infrastructure
www.SystemsStore.com          Tel: 407-656-3719
Sales at SystemsStore.com