[EAS] Severe weather drills

[David Turnmire]

I think it is useful to identify WHAT we are testing with a given test.  
The technical infrastructure?  Or the proper programming of the 
devices?  One of my concerns with the "National EAS" test is that in my 
view, it kind of got the cart before the horse.   Up until that point 
(or since for that matter) there had been NO end-to-end tests of the 
system in so far as was unique to the PEP and national originated alerts 
go.  We could have just as easily used an RMT for the first test (with 
some "tweaks" to accommodate the limits on number of FIPS codes 
allowed).  Most of the problems, including the "bad audio" issue, would 
have been identified by that, without needing to resort to a "live code" 
test.

Once we could accomplish that test with any reasonably acceptable 
definition of "success", we could then have proceeded with the "live 
code" EAN test.... preferably one long enough to test one of the key 
things that separates the EAN from other codes... the fact that it can 
be longer than 2 minutes in duration.  Please note there are a finite 
number of models of decoders out there.  If all you wanted to do was 
determine how a particular manufacturer implemented their code specific 
to EANs, you hardly need to rely on a test impacting 300 million 
citizens to accomplish that.

There are lots of ways to accomplish what we want for testing the 
technical infrastructure.  The most straight forward (if FCC rule making 
can be considered such), is to implement the "All USA" FIPS code and 
reserve one month out of the year for a nationally originated RMT using 
such a code.  Set the new rule's implementation date a couple years 
later to give everyone time to adapt their RMT schedules and update 
decoder firmware as necessary.

All of the above deals primarily with testing technical infrastructure.  
Testing the proper programming of the devices, is an entirely different 
topic.  Some engineers like to claim that is a "non issue" because it is 
"simple".  Yeah, right.  The devices out there vary in their 
"simplicity" and the people programming them vary widely in what is 
"simple" to them.  Bottom line is most of us have seen miss-programmed 
decoders.  Even if you restrict "miss-programming" to being just about 
FIPS codes and event codes, there is lots of permutations there, 
especially for the more "flexible" decoders such as the SAGE.  There 
aren't enough months in the year to do "live code" testing to test all 
of the possible errors that might be done by a particular broadcaster.  
Better to handle that by some good "mentoring" at the local level as 
well as plenty of redundancy in the distribution paths and careful 
observations by the local LECCs to the results of RMTs in their area.

Dave