[EAS] New EAS Forum posting: A vision for what to do now that the FCC has eliminated the GMC

[Richard Rudman]

Mike/Everyone:

The parameter for what you are suggesting already exist in properly formatter CAP messages. Not that I said that warnings should be and "element" of the response decision process, not an "automatic".

I strongly suggest that everyone who is going to be involved with this process take FEMA's IS247 course and then take the test. Some of this will become clearer to you once you see what the existing elements are. 

What IS247 does not convey in my opinion is a stronger sense of mandate and duty on the part of local and state emergency management to issue warnings. Mike is correct that not all events require public warnings, and sometimes the call could even be made that a warning could make things worse. 

Having qualified professionals in charge of the warning evaluation process who understand their legal (and moral) duty and mandate in more EM organizations would be a good thing. An example of a group of people who seem to have it right most of the time are the designated AMBER coordinators in law enforcement. (AMBER (CAE) events are not warnings, however, by definition.)

Richard

On Jan 14, 2012, at 7:12 PM, Mike McCarthy wrote:

> I think there should be a very clear distinction between first response 
> and triggering warning/advisory dissemination.