[EAS] Analysis of EAS Test Report

[Rich Parker]

Thanks for this Gary - I am heading to our state EAS/SECC meeting this morning - we will be at the NWS offices in BTV and the meeting will include VT Emergency Management, local broadcasters and even a representative from a major Cable TV company. This is great progress for us and I hope it is mirrored in other states as well.

I will bring up the 'highlights' of the report in the meeting, and make sure folks get the link.

One thing which I noticed is the 'concern' about non-reporting stations - if I remember correctly, the 'forms' were rather 'UDP' in nature - that is, folks 'thought' they filed them, but there was absolutely zero confirming feed back, nor was there any mechanism (other than re-submitting a form) for any correction or modifications. 

While this may seem like a small matter, I hope that the procedure for this can be addressed in any additional tests - it would surely help compliance and avoid any confusion.

Another question which is on our agenda is whether or not IP delivery can be considered a valid 'alternate' monitoring source - I understand there is a process for putting something like that in our plan and getting it 'approved' but so far I am not aware of any specific process. The reason this is an issue for us is two-fold - there are a number of stations here in VT which cannot receive NWS broadcasts - due to the terrain here in our mountainous state. This problem is compounded by the fact that there are no NWS stations within Vermont which are assigned to cover weather events in the southwestern-most counties - those are assumed to have been covered by Albany NWS. This puts a huge wrench in a lot of stations' ability to get the alerts - particularly those who are on the fringe of both stations.

Internally, we have a feed from VEM which takes an off-air pickup of the Albany NWS and relays it via microwave to the SP/LP stations - but due to the 'nature' of NWS alerts, many (most) of these are not re-transmitted (and really, you can only relay just so many Thunderstorm Warnings and SVR's before PD's are beating down your doors with torches and pitchforks).

Finally, the fact that we did not see a 'test' of the system through 'other' channels - cell carriers in particular - makes folks think it has limited scope - and while this is perhaps the most 'knotty' question - how do we get FEMA/FCC to recognize that a large number of people are 'on IP' all the time and may never get an alert - unless it is also mandated for local/national ISP's in some manner (the technical details of that can of worms is best left for those of greater technical wizardry)?

Thanks,

Rich Parker
Vermont SECC

 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Timm" <gteas at sbcglobal.net>

For an in-depth analysis of the FCC PSHSB report on the Nationwide EAS Test, and more importantly the next steps of proposed rules they recommend for the FCC to embark on, see my AWARE post:
http://www.awareforum.org/2013/04/fcc-bureau-issues-nationwide-eas-test-report/
 
Gary Timm
WI SECC

__________________________________________________________
The EAS Forum Discussion List is hosted by the BWWG (Broadcast Warning Working Group). http://eas.radiolists.net
Please invite your friends to join our Forum! The sign up is at: http://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/eas
___________________________________________________________

-- 

--