|
|
"This is a test of the Emergency
Alert System—this is only a test…"
 You will occasionally hear or
see these words on your local broadcast station or cable system.
In 1951, President Harry Truman
established CONELRAD (Control of Electromagnetic Radiation) as the
first national alerting system. Under CONELRAD, radio stations were
required to broadcast only on certain frequencies during an emergency alert. This prevented an enemy from attacking by using transmissions
from broadcast stations as a guide for their target.
CONELRAD later became the
"Emergency Broadcast System" (EBS). The EBS was designed to provide the
President with a means to address the American people in the event of a
national emergency. Through the EBS, the President had access to
thousands of broadcast stations to send an emergency message to the
public.
In 1994, to overcome some of the
limitations of the older EBS system, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) replaced the EBS with the Emergency
Alert System (EAS). The major difference between EBS and EAS is the
method used to alert broadcast stations about an incoming message.
The EAS provides not only the
President, but national, state and local authorities, with the ability
to give emergency information to the general public via broadcast
stations, cable and wireless cable systems. While participation in
national EAS alerts is mandatory for these providers, state and local
area EAS participation is voluntary.
FCC Fact Sheet.
|
Government Action
FCC TAKES ACTION TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN NATION'S EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM. The Commission adopted a proposal that strengthens the nation's Emergency Alert System (EAS). The Order promotes the development of fully digital Next Generation technologies and delivery systems that will better serve the American public. News Release. Adopted: 05/31/2007. News Media Contact: Robert Kenny at (202) 418-2668, email: robert.kenny@fcc.gov PSHSB. Contact Dana Shaffer at (202) 418-0832, email: dana.shaffer@fcc.gov or Tom Beers at (202) 418-0952, email: tom.beers@fcc.gov < http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-273458A1.doc >
The Commission also adopted
a Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
that seeks comment on how the Commission can best help develop a
next-generation alert and warning system that takes full advantage of
digital media’s potential. The Commission seeks comment on the type of
system architecture and common protocols
that would be required in such a system. The Commission also asks
questions regarding specific technologies, particularly, how the
Commission could facilitate the effective integration of wireless technologies into a next
generation alert and warning system, and whether traditional telephone companies
that plan to provide high definition digital content to customers’
homes through fiber optic connections should have public alert and
warning responsibilities. In addition, the Further
Notice seeks comment on issues relating to the participation of state
and local authorities in the EAS system.
The Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking also asks how a next
generation EAS can more effectively reach individuals with hearing and
vision disabilities. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on how the
EAS rules should be revised to more effectively reach non-English
speaking individuals. -- Public
Notice
66. System architecture/message distribution. Some
commenters argue that the current distribution system is flawed, and
that EAS messages should be distributed directly to media outlets. We
seek comment on this assertion. Would such point-to-multi-point
distribution deliver alerts more quickly to the public? Would it do so
more efficiently? Many commenters, such as WTOP/WXTR, propose that a
satellite-based system be used. Would such a system be effective?
Should it be deployed in addition to or instead of the current system?
APTS proposes that the PBS satellite system offers a model for
distribution of national or state and local alerts. We seek comment on
the APTS proposal. We note that the PBS satellite system is an integral
part of FEMA’s Digital Emergency Alert System (DEAS) National Capital
Region Pilot, and we expect to incorporate the results of that pilot
into our record. We also seek comment on other distribution models. For
example, given its inherent robustness, we believe the Internet should
serve an important role in distribution of alerts and warnings.
67. Common protocols.
The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) argues
that emergency alerts should flow rapidly and simultaneously through
all available information conduits to first responders and the public.
Should such a ubiquitous distribution be a goal of a digitally-based
alert system? Most commenters agree that in order for a digitally-based
alert and warning system to be distributed simultaneously over multiple
platforms, a common messaging protocol must be adopted. We seek comment
on this assertion. SWN Communications, Inc. contends that the Common Alerting Protocol (CAP),
endorsed by the PPW and many public and private organizations
responsible for alerts, offers the most practical means of quickly
creating an effective interface between the emergency manager and
multiple emergency alert and notification systems to significantly
improve national alert and warning capability. Should CAP be adopted as
the common messaging protocol for any future digitally-based alert
system? Should we require the adoption of CAP for EAS alerts? If CAP
were to be adopted, would it allow simultaneous distribution to radio,
television, and wireless media such as mobile telephones and PDAs? How
would CAP be used to ensure uniformity of alerts across such multiple
platforms? For example, if the White House were to issue a national
message how would CAP accommodate an audio message with a shorter,
text-based message appropriate for a PDA screen?
Public
Notice
- White House
- Congress / Legislation
- S 1753 Warning, Alerts and Response Network
(WARN) Act 2005
- All-Hazards
Alert Systems Hearing Wednesday, July 27 2005 -
10:00 AM - SR-253 Senate Commerce Committee
- FCC
- Dept of Commerce
- NSTC Subcommittee on Disaster
Reduction Effective
Disaster Warnings (2000) p. 25
- "RECOMMENDATION: A standard method should be
developed to collect and relay
instantaneously and automatically all types of hazard warnings and
reports locally,
regionally, and nationally for input into a wide variety of
dissemination systems. The
National Weather Service (NWS) has the most advanced system of this
type that could
be expanded to fill the need. Proper attribution of the warning to the
agency that
issues it needs to be ensured."
- FEMA
- Government Internet EAS Systems
- Private Warning Services and Products
- Services
- Airit2me SMS
alerting from any web enabled device
- ProAlert.us
weather and civil emergency alerts via
email or text ready mobile phones or pagers
- Feedbeep
RSS to SMS (turns RSS feeds into SMS messages)
- Horman
America, Inc. Network alerts
- Interline
weather, state and federal emergencies, amber alter
- ScanUSA
"SCAN is the Safe Community Alert Network -- a public warning
system that allows local police departments, fire departments,
emergency management services organizations, schools and public safety
agencies to broadcast emergency information directly to the computers,
mobile phones, pagers and PDAs of their neighborhood and local
residents."
- Equipment Vendors
- Cybersecurity
- Weather Related
- Projects
- Benefits
- Can operate successfully when voice networks are
congested or inoperable
- Ability to reach mobile people through wireless
devices
- Ability to tailor messages to reach specific
groups (ie., nurses, reserves, top leaders, employees of specific
agency, police, general public)
- Interactive - once activated, can permit the
recipient to receive a wide variety of additional related information
- Can have a confirmation function so that you
know recipients have received message
- Issues
- Notifying all targeted individuals on all devices
simultaneously
- Time delay in getting all messages out to all
devices over all networks
- Introduced discrepancies in messages as send
separate messages to separate networks or devices
- Blocked Messages
- DOS: Internet EAS systems could be targets of
DOS attacks.
- SPAM
- Network Side: Email and messages to
wireless devices being blocked as spam.
The messages will come out as a large amount of traffic into the
network and can look to filters like spam. Entities designing text
message alert systems may wish to work with major email distributors
and local wireless device and mobile phone carriers to ensure that
their messages are not blocked.
- Message may look like SPAM to the
recipient, and deleted without opening, or ignored. EAS messages may
need a trust system so that both the network and the recipient can authenticate
the message.
- Whether the EAS client application was online
- In other words, if the EAS system is IM based, and the IM application is not
on, then the EAS message would not be received.
- Reliability of the
emergency alert system
- whether it could be subject to attack.
- Whether it could be authenticated
- Whether it could be spoofed
- Vulnerability to network congestion - priority traffic status
- Redundancy (servers, infrastructure, telecom
services)
- power outage and continuance of operations
- Will the service be vulnerable to the event
which it is suppose be sending alerts out about?
- Whether transmission of bulk text messages
could overwhelm wireless device networks
- 24/7 operations
- System Testing
- System testing with appropriate subject lines
and during appropriate times so as not to panic or disturb the
recipients (causing mobile devices to go off in the middle of the night
would probably not be a good idea).
- Roaming - when out of region, alerts of region
are of limited use. When in a foreign region, it would be useful to get
those alerts. But see geolocation.
- Appropriate language (ie., english, spanish,
french, translation options)
- Appropriate use policy
- Who gets to post messages
- What events get to be posted (after Hurricane
Isabel Arlington Emergency Alert used the system to announce where ice
could be acquired, as people were without electricity for about a week.
It was very cool).
- Audience: There are two different audiences for
these alerts: (1) general public and (2) appropriate officials or first
responders. In the second case, the Internet could be used to send
alerts to officials who then move the message to non-Internet mediums.
Also, in the second case, the message could include protocols that
cause automatic actions at the recipients.
- Applications, potential
- Email
- IM
- RSS
- Webpages
- Webpage scrolls
- Proprietary
- Related issues
- Reverse 911 in
VoIP environment
Papers
Emergency Alert & Radio
Where individuals increasingly listen to portable
music devices (ie., iPods), satellite radio, or webcasts, emergency
alerts broadcast of local radio are ineffective.
Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service:
XM Radio has begun to partner with local jurisdictions
to broadcast emergency information over its local traffic and weather
stations. XM radio also has a dedicated emergency channel that can be
activated in times of emergency. XM
Channel 247 (as in 24 / 7)
Sirius has its Sirius Emergency System on Channel 184.
Links
News
|
