[EAS] Should the RWT EAS Code be abolished?

[Richard Rudman]

What I think we are talking about are two issues: (1) Ways to reinforce distribution of warnings and (2) Ability to do tests so we know rapidly if there is a disconnect or other type of impairment that would prevent airing an EAS message.

First, I submit that we need to establish as many wireless Local Area Relay Networks (LRN) as possible so we can get away from the current LP distribution model, yet another idea some of us would like to see the FCC pick up on. LP relay is just another form of a system with a higher potential for single point failure than we should tolerate for public warnings. Further, as other s have pointed out, a lot of LP stations that used to have full staffs (and even newsrooms) are running fully or partially automated with skeleton staffs. We need only look to Washington State to see how the LRN model can help.

LRN Type 1: A government licensed VHF or UHF channel dedicated for Part 11 EAS and follow-on information from emergency management. May not be fully CAP capable due if channel bandwidth is not adequate due t FCC refarming initiatives.

LRN TYpe 2: A government licensed VHF or UHF channel share with a low priority government use that can be interrupted for Part 11 EAS and follow-on information from emergency management. May not be fully CAP capable due if channel bandwidth is not adequate due to existing FCC refarming initiatives.

LRN Type 3: One or more point-to-point wireless links from a government warning center to one or more broadcast DTV stations that can interrupt a low priority DTV channel with CAP-EAS voice, data, sand/or video, and follow-on emergency information from emergency managers. Fully CAP capable if wireless link to 

LRN TYpe 4: A wideband wireless link from a government warning center dedicated for Part 11 EAS and follow-on information from emergency management. Would require FCC to set aside a limited number of dedicated wideband channels for EAS. SBE and the BWWG have both asked the FCC to do this.  

Then we need a closed circuit monitoring system that can be checked automatically by each EAS "Client", possibly on a daily basis. System would be able to issue an audible, email to text alarm to supervisory personnel if a link goes away.

if you think about it, we already have Type 1 LRN's in place nationwide for one form of local EAS monitoring -- the NOAA/NWS Weather Radio.

Having the benefit of hindsight, I wish we had asked for a way for new EAS devices to do their own closed circuit self tests to a special non-air output on the new boxes. There are a lot of great and helpful capabilities in the new boxes based on software -- maybe there are more test capabilities already built in to many of the new EAS devices than we know about yet?

Good discussion. Let's hear more ideas!

Richard

On Nov 25, 2011, at 3:20 PM, Darryl Parker wrote:

> This provision gives a Chief Operator a means to determine whether or not the station's EAS decoding system is functioning properly. Without RWTs, this tool would be lost.