[EAS] The 2017 EAS Handbook for LP-1's

[Sean Donelan]

On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Clay Freinwald wrote:
> Every stop and think what would happen if a State elected to not participate
> with EAS?    A lot of what's going on in the real world is not based on
> rules but rather on tradition by those that volunteer to get the job done
> -without - a regulatory framework.

We've already seen what happens. In at least a couple of states
effectively cease participating by 2005. Between 1994 and 2004, FEMA 
scaled back its civil defense and warning programs after the end of the 
cold war. FCC eliminated its national advisory board. And the volunteers 
in some states retired and stopped working on SECCs.  By the time I was 
researching how to implement EAS in 2005, I found at least two states 
didn't have functional EAS systems.

There may have been more states, but I wasn't looking at all 50 states 
plus territories.  In 2005, I wanted to use a PEP station near Kansas City 
as the nation-wide feed for an IPTV system, but was told I had to use 
separate EAS feeds in each state and local area.  So I started researching 
the state of EAS in each of those states in 2005-2006.

There was a lot of variability between states, and as I said, in at least 
two states, EAS was effectively non-functional. In several other states, 
EAS didn't work well. They couldn't get a national message. Yes, 
broadcasters in those states continued to do monthly tests and weather 
alerts. But, I was told that the state officials decided they didn't want 
participate, the SECC didn't have any meetings or really members, and the 
"state EAS plan" hadn't been updated since the 1990s.

In the last 10 years, EAS has gotten better nationwide. You may not 
notice it, looking only at a single state.

In 2017, all 50 states now have at least minimal SECCs again, with some 
state official participating. FEMA expanded its PEP station program, and 
every state is covered by least one national source. IPAWS and Wireless 
Emergency Alerts has gotten the attention of local emergency officials, 
and they seem to be more interested in all types of public alerting 
systems including EAS.

Volunteers are important, but I wouldn't dismiss the importance of 
official attention and participation.

The FCC Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau became much more active 
with EAS during and after the nation-wide tests. Its a P.I.T.A., but just 
asking copies of plans and updating the EAS contacts on the FCC website 
helped re-activate SECCs in states. Moving the EAS program out of the 
FCC Enforcement Bureau also helped.

The WARN Act helped reinvigorate the FEMA National Continuity Programs 
office and created the IPAWS program. It seemed to provide focus to FEMA's 
public alerting programs. The problems with the national test in 2009 
seems to have been a good thing, because it got the attention of senior 
leadership.

At the state-level, state officials seem to like IPAWS and want to use 
Wireless Emergency Alerts.  IPAWS has created new interest in all types of 
public alerting systems, including EAS. The biggest problem seems to be 
they don't always understand the differences between EAS, WEA and other 
mass notification systems; and don't have much training using various 
public alerting systems.

I also wouldn't dismiss the impact of sales people from several mass 
notification system companies during the last 10 years. Subscription 
alerting systems are now a major part of public alerting. Local emergency 
offices pay much more in subscription fees to use these systems, so they 
must feel its worth the price.