[EAS] "improving" EAS?

[Ed Czarnecki]

OK, I think that's stretching it a bit, but do I see your point.  The
proposed rulemaking asks for additional comment on whether there should be a
reporting process on false EAS alerts.  The context in this R&O, and the
preceding Notice is for a fake or erroneous alert - like Bobby Bones,
zombies, and that sort of thing.  This wouldn't seem to cover a bona fide
alert for circumstances that don't materialize.  Hawaii is a new scenario
though - it was bona fide when issued (i.e. the originating gov't employee
thought it was real when issued), but shown to be in error some time after
issuance.

So, yeah, this request for Comment deserves a good deal of input from all of
is.  And perhaps part of the Comments to the FCC is that they should define
terms explicitly.  What is a "false alert" that would trigger a reporting
requirement.  And reporting after 24 hours of discovery - that's 24 hours
from the station's discovery, not the audience or any other entity?  And is
24 hours reasonable (that could cut both ways)?

-----Original Message-----
From: EAS [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Steve Schoon

Furthermore, if the NWS issues a SVR claiming 60+ MPH winds and damaging
hail for your community and it doesn't come to pass, it can effectively be
called a FALSE ALERT!  Every attorney in every courtroom in the country will
argue it as such.
What about a radar indicated TOR that remained only radar indicated, no
evidence of a touchdown?  By definition, it's a funnel cloud until or unless