[EAS] Muddy the waters a bit more

[R.V.Zeigler]

Since it is a weekend and we are all thinking about everything EAS, I 
would like to throw out a few things I have had in the back of my mind.

First, when do we finally open the can of worms that is multi-language 
EAS? Will it be during the NPRM or whatever route the Part 11 
re-write/change takes? Do we wait and deploy whatever system is finally 
decided on, and deal with it post deployment? I am sure that we will 
have to wait until the 2010 census figures are digested and posted in 
their final form. This is something we all need to be thinking about 
because we are going to have to deal with it eventually, even though 
there are many, more pressing, issues confronting us right now.

The other thing that I have been hearing rumblings about is the current 
trend in the midwest legislatures towards re-asserting their 10th 
Amendment rights. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the 
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the 
States respectively, or to the people" A number of the state 
legislatures are growing tired of unfunded federal mandates, such as 
those brought on by what may be required to deploy EAS/CAP. Many of the 
initial DHS grants, loans, etc. were encumbered by other requirements 
and needs before EAS/CAP deployment was defined to the point where 
serious investigation and planning could be considered. We have a 
situation where the state agencies do not have additional funds to buy 
equipment, or extended bandwidth subscriptions with which a workable 
EAS/CAP solution could be deployed, the broadcasters needs 
notwithstanding. Expecting the states to cut other agency budgets to 
fund the state's part of this federally mandated system is at the heart 
of the 10th Amendment argument. It is also likely to meet with extra 
resistance due to this particular fact. Expecting broadcasters to pay 
for the state's equipment is not something I personally have the 
intestinal fortitude to even bring up at a state convention, or other 
broadcaster gathering.

The overall situation, as I see it, is this: Having a robust and secure 
dissemination of emergency information available for delivery to the 
public by multiple means, and in a timely manner, is a VERY good idea, 
and one worth pursuing. Having mandated timetables before the system is 
finalized, and requiring a financially troubled industry, and their 
equally troubled state agencies deploy said system, at this particular 
time and without some kind of funding mechanism, is in no ones best 
interest.

As a private citizen only, and not speaking for any boards or committees 
I may serve on, I would like to suggest the following idea for critique: 
Have CAP information  transmitted on DBS channels such as Dish Network, 
Direct TV, and the like. Have economical receivers available for 
broadcasters, cable, cellular, sign companies and any other responsible 
entities to only receive this information, and make it available to 
in-house ENDEC('s) by their internal computer networks or direct 
connection via RJ-45. Have any "back-haul" confirmation of received 
messages returned via the internet. It is more important to receive the 
info, than it is to send confirmation that it has been received. State 
and Federal agencies could send their up-linked information to the 
national clearing house for dissemination by whatever means necessary or 
whatever means they currently have in place.

I am sure the above idea has a number of specific situations where it 
would not work, but overall I think it would cover most of CONUS, and 
some of OCONUS. I also think it could be one of the less expensive 
alternatives to get the final EAS/CAP product to the end user.

Rod

-- 
R. V. Zeigler, Dir. of Eng.
Nebraska Rural Radio Assn.
KRVN-KTIC-KNEB
Newsletter: http://tinyurl.com/RRNnews