Q:     I programmed my DASDEC with the IPAWS OPEN URL but have not seen any tests yet. When are they supposed to come through?

A:    The IPAWS OPEN EAS CAP RWT’s are set to go out during your local 11 AM hour on each Monday.  FEMA has set up a routine for testing so all tests, no matter where you are, will happen at your local 11:00 hour on Mondays.  Their routine begins in Guam and CNMI and walks through eight other US time zones.  If a CAP device is properly configured the operator will see only the RWT intended for their local time zone. There are some exceptions. Al Kenyon provided me with a list of states with their assigned time zones and state FIPS codes:

Q:     Have any firewall issues associated with IPAWS OPEN polling been identified?

A:    So far, no firewall issues have been identified. (If anyone has identified a an IPAWS OPEN firewall issue, please let us know!)

Q:    When I entered a FIPS code for San Diego County for IPAWS OPEN, do I have to also program in the DC FIPS Code to get national EAS events?

A:    This should not be necessary since all boxes should have a default to recognize the EAN EAS code. The Commission has yet to rule on the 000000 All-US code.  Al Kenyon does not advise programming in the DC FIPS code into a CAP-EAS device unless it is done using an EAN-specific filter.  Otherwise the EAS box will likely receive severe weather alerts for the DC area.

Q:    Are FIPS Codes the best/only granularity than can be selected under IPAWS OPEN right now?

A:    The CAP standard includes provision to use geo shapefiles to specify targeted alerting areas.  As far as we know, current CAP-EAS devices do not now have the ability to read and interpret geo shapefiles. This type of geo-description is included in IPAWS OPEN messages supporting alerting pathways that are now more “targetable” such as cell tower/tower sector targeting and Enhanced Telephone Notification such as Reverse 911(tm).

Q:     What about programming EAS devices for statewide events that would be originated from CalEMA when they get certified to go through IPAWS OPEN without entering a lot of FIPS codes? [ In case anyone does not know what Boolean logic is:  http://www.ithacalibrary.com/sp/subjects/boolean ]

A:    CAP EAS devices should utilize Boolean logic  to accept alerts directed to the entire state based on filters accepting alerts for one or more counties within that state.  This may vary by manufacturer.

Q:    When will SAGE release their IPAWS OPEN profile?

A:    After checking with Sage EAS guru Harold Price yesterday, he says that they will release the SAGE IPAWS OPEN profile during the week of May 2-26.

Thanks again to Al and Harold for helping to provide answers to questions that came up at the meeting. If anyone has more questions, please email me off list at rar01@mac.com and I will try my best to come up with answers.

This update is a result of incorporating feedback and suggestions from a number of  SECC sources. Version 4.0 incorporates changes to the structure and operation of the SECC, and a FEMA graphic that illustrates the IPAWS OPEN structure.

Version 3.1 incorporates corrections and changes suggested by manufacturers and SECC Chairs specific to CAP provisions in Part 11. This version includes a table that may be useful to describe CAP monitoring assignments for your state. Updated versions will be posted if warranted.

The Broadcast Warning Working Group held an SECC plan writing workshop during the recent NAB Convention. Twenty-five EAS stakeholders representing state committees, local committees, manufacturers, and emergency management attended. The goal was to come up with a sample state plan with elements that take revisions we know about so far to Part 11 into account. The plan, in Microsoft Word .doc format is posted here for download.

Different browsers handle downloads of .doc and .PDF differently. If your download of the sample plan produces an error message, there is a simple work-around. Save the downloaded file and either open it from your download folder or by using the “Open” option for MS Word or Open Office. If you still experience download problems, email rar01@mac.com and a copy will be sent to you directly.

SECC_SAMPLE_PLAN_Version 4.0

Here is the full text of the relevant part of today’s FCC TTS decision:

Accordingly, pursuant to section 1.108 of our rules,23 on our own motion we reconsider and revise section 11.56(a)(2) of our rules to replace the parenthetical phrase “except that any and all specifications set forth therein related to using text-to-speech technology and gubernatorial ‘must carry’ shall not be followed” with the phrase “except that any and all specifications set forth therein related to gubernatorial ‘must carry’ shall not be followed, and that EAS Participants may adhere to the specifications related to text-to-speech on a voluntary basis.”24 We also revise footnote 118 of the Fifth Report and Order to delete the phrase “While we do not permit the construction of EAS audio from a CAP text message at this time . . . ”25 and revise footnote 496 of the Fifth Report and Order to delete the phrase “ . . . we will not allow EAS Participants to use text-to-speech software configured in their EAS equipment to generate the audio portion of an EAS message . . .”26 With these revisions, we hereby defer consideration of the ECIG Implementation Guide’s adoption of TTS software
configured in EAS equipment to generate the audio portion of an EAS message, and thus neither require nor prohibit EAS Participants from following the ECIG Implementation Guide’s specifications on use of TTS.

Twenty-Five EAS subject experts participated in the Broadcast Warning Working Group (BWWG) SECC plan writing workshop today at NAB in Las Vegas:

Adrienne Abbott, Nevada SECC / BWWG

Alan Alsobrook, Wholenews

Manny Centano, FEMA

Bill Croghan, Nevada SECC

Ed Czarnecki, Monroe Electronics

Jim Dalke, Washington State SECC

Larry Estlack, Dir. Of Technology, MAB

James Gorman, GR

Don Heppleman, Minnesota SECC

Don Miller, MyStatesUSA

Barry Mishkind, Broadcast Desktop Resource / BWWG

George Molnar, Vegas PBS/Clark County LECC

Marcos O’Rourke, Orange County, CA LECC

David Ostmo, Texas SECC / BWWG

Darryl Parker, TFT

Harold Price, SAGE

Bill Robertson, Digital Alert Systems

Bill Ruck, Curmudgeon, San Francisco

Richard Rudman, California SECC / BWWG

Steve Scott, Sinclair Broadcasting

Matthew Straeb, GSS

Gary Timm, Wisconsin SECC / AWARE Forum

Don Walker, WCS Consulting

Larry Wilkins, Alabama SECC

Rod Zeigler, Nebraska SECC

A draft sample SECC plan document was circulated for later comment by the attendees. The plan consists of two parts. The first part outlines policies that are not likely to change. The second part consists of a series of Communications Operational Orders (COO’s) that will likely have to be updated. Once a plan written this way is signed by all agencies concerned, there is no need to have the plan re-signed when elements like SECC members, call letters or monitoring assignments change.

Most of the two-hour meeting was a discussion of best practices for EAS we can offer to state and local committees to help them rewrite their plans and make EAS a more effective warning system. Subsequent postings on the EAS Forum will go into details, but a number of best practices central themes were identified:

• Getting both emergency managers and broadcasters to look at EAS from the point of view of audiences at risk

• Finding ways to get more support in the emergency management community to originate EAS messages and trying to fix the disconnect between the emergency management community and broadcasters and cable operators.

• The need to implement better ways that CAP-EAS makes possible to target EAS messages to those affected than the current FIPS codes

• Bring the Department of Justice back into the EAS Federal Partnership to assure continued support for AMBER alerts.

• Grant finding ideas to support training and education about EAS in the emergency management community.

• Grant funding ideas to support the work of volunteer state and local committees

• Ideas to implement Digital Local Relay Networks to back up the public Internet for IPAWS OPEN message distribution

• Coordination of the overall warning effort with other warning systems like CMAS[1]

• Outreach to NEMA, IAEM and APCO[2]

The BWWG would like to thank NAB’s Larry Walke for making a room available for this meeting on short notice.

SUPPLEMENTAL MEETING NOTES BY BWWG CORE MEMBER ADRIENNE ABBOTT

BWWG PLAN WRITING AND BEST PRACTICES WORKSHOP MEETING NOTES

Adrienne Abbott, BWWG Core member

Thanks to BWWG core member Adrienne Abbott (SECC, Nevada) for sending me her notes on the meeting yesterday held during NAB Week to supplement my notes that can be found at [ http://eas.radiolists.net/ ]. Many thanks to NAB for getting us a room to meet in on very short notice.

I took the liberty of adding to what Adrienne gave me within (   ) in the following:

• New/rewritten state and local  plans are needed to (clearly) define roles and procedures for the use of CAP (within EAS, and to implement changes in FCC Part 11).
• What are some Best Practices that can/should be part of the new procedures (that we need to get out to state and local committees, and warning centers)?
• Who signs off on new plans?
• State and local agencies need to be involved in plan writing and to develop (better) trust in broadcasters and EAS
• (FEMA online training module) IS 247 is a prerequisite for activators to use CAP, broadcasters should take it also. The course is not perfect yet. It would be good to see how well the CAP system handles the messages IS-247 students write.
• Manny Centeno notes that with the new CAP technology  the new EAS plans should be part of procedures at EOC’s and dispatch centers so messages can be sent easily and quickly.
• Bill Ruck told the group that he has found police and fire chiefs and other public safety officials are concerned about the cost of training First Responders on CAP EAS.
• Manny responded suggested that he has information on grants and language for grant writing that he can email information to anyone who needs it.  He also suggested that requests for grant funding include money for training and meetings with emergency officials. He also suggested that Provisions be made to educate the public on EAS and other warning messages so they know what’s going on, what to do and what to expect.
• Richard reminded everyone that CAP EAS is not just for origination of EAS messages and that there is room now for different levels of messages and different paths for that information (for other warning systems like CMAS).
• That was followed by a discussion on the current FCC  proposal to ban the use of Text to Speech (TTS) technology. Larry Estlack noted that his state had been using a GSS CAP system for over a year and had had two AMBER Alerts in that time where TTS was used  with no problems or mispronunciations. Harold Price predicted that the TTS situation would be wrapped up this week and Don Miller passed on some information from the Washington state Broadcasters Association about the legal action they were taking to prevent the FCC from banning TTS. They all predicted that the FCC would announce this week that they were dropping the proposal.
• David Ostmo of Sinclair Texas brought up the subject of using digital TV side channels as a secondary or backup distribution system. Las Vegas PBS described how local public safety officials were using ther their side channels to distribute information to First Responders in the field. there was a brief and  weedy discussion about digitally packaging the CAP message, formats, and licensing that might be needed for such a system. Harold Price reminded everyone that no matter was systems were used there was a need to make sure the technology worked in the field.
• Barry Mishkind told the group the new plans should include recommendations about specific locations of the event in the warning and the station issuing the warning.
• Manny added that there was a need for strong leadership on EAS issues at the national level and that it didn’t seem like there was a strong commitment to Public Warning from radio and TV station management. Ed Czarnecki pointed out that there was such a commitment from the mobile carriers and that CTIA was taking a strong position on their new role in CMAS and Public Warning.  Matt Straeb noted that the industry is even talking about expanding the current 90 character text message limits to better accomodate emergency messages. Bill Ruck reminded the group that they shouldn’t confuse engineering problems with political problems.
• Richard and Larry Estlack talked about how AMBER Alerts had increased  awareness of EAS and broadcasters role in Public Warning.
• Richard directed the conversation to the issue of cable over ride of local EAS messages and to David Ostmo as the BWWG expert on cable service. After a brief discussion on current technology and costs, David and Ed Czarnecki predicted that new technology would be in the field and the problem would resolve itself in five years.
• Several attendees brought up the subject of testing and the importance of getting state and local emergency officials involved in the routine testing of the system.
• Manny again noted the need for strong leadership on EAS issues and broadcasters. Suggestions ere offered about developing public private programs for CAP EAS similar to what the Department of Justice had done with AMBER Alerts. suggestions were made that because DoJ had been so successful with the AMBER programs and that AMBER Alerts would be part of CAP that DoJ work with FEMA and the FCC to put together a series of training and education programs.
• Manny reminded everyone that there would be CAP EAS demos at the FEMA booth daily at 10 and 2.
• After other final comments Richard adjourned the meeting.

Please watch the EAS Forum for more on this project.

The BWWG filed detailed ex parte support Comments today that should appear on the FCC’s Electronic Comments Filing System (ECFS) sometime on Monday, April 2.

Here is a PDF copy of what we filed:

BWWG_ExParte_Final

2011-09-27 10-00-00 KMGV RMT

The FCC announced at the meeting today that they expect the long-awaited formal publication of the Fifth Report and Order will happen in the next week or so, We were told that the delay was caused by a review of the ECIG document that the FCC made a part of the Report and Order.

A PDF copy of what FEMA filed can be found below.

We were told that Monroe Electronics also filed a Petition. More on this as events warrant.

FEMA Petition for Recon to 5th R_O

* Core members of the Broadcast Warning Working Group

One for his DTV station, KXLY-DT

FebRMT_KXLY-DT_(SAGE)

The other for his FM station, KXLY.

FebRMT_KXLY-FM_(WSI)

Marlin Jackson with the KXLY Broadcast Group in Spokane, Washington recently posted proof that TTS does work, works well, and significantly improves the value of EAS warnings for all audiences, including those with visual and hearing impairments.

He said, “For the first time KXLY DT crawled the actual message rather than just the header information.  It did crawl the header first then added the following:

This is a test, only a test of the emergency alert system in Washington State. If this had been a real emergency you would have been instructed what to do. The following tones will conclude this test from Washington State E O C.

KXLY connects its CAP EAS device to two Harris character generators. One is for the HD main channel and the other for the SD second channel.

The scrolled message seen on screen for the KXLY Main and HD channels was identical to the audio on their audio channels.”

As Marlin put it, “The hearing impaired can now see what the message really is rather than just that there is an alert. We have a very active hearing impaired group in our area. (Spokane, WA) They are also an active and important part of our LECC.”

The Broadcast Warning Working Group believes the FCC should reconsider their current TTS ban. The benefits of TTS should not be withheld from the visually and hearing impaired communities, much less the general public. Relying on “canned” EAS scrolled messages generated by legacy EAS codes must come to an end as quickly as possible. We strongly support the efforts of the Washington State SECC and other EAS stakeholders to ask the FCC to reconsider and allow properly implemented and managed EAS TTS – NOW!