WASHINGTON—Five years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and well into another active hurricane season, the U.S. government finally appears ready to bring wireless and other technologies into an emergency alert system that has changed little since the Cold War.
However, policy and operational complications could arise because EAS agendas in Congress, the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Communications Commission do not necessarily line up neatly.
The Senate today is expected vote on the Warning, Alerts and Response Network Act, which has been amended to a port security bill. The bipartisan WARN bill, championed by Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), was moving smoothly toward a vote several months ago until a dispute broke out between Republicans and Democrats over whether a new national emergency alert office should reside in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or in the Federal Emergency Management Agency. There were indications late last week that Republicans got the best of whatever compromise was reached, with FEMA given the nod to house the national office.
Last month, after suspected terrorist plotters were rounded up in the United Kingdom, DeMint forcefully called for Senate action on his bill.
“The London terrorist arrests remind us that we are at war with a lethal and determined enemy, and we must continually improve our abilities to respond to new threats,” said DeMint. “The WARN Act is an important step that will modernize our national emergency alert system to better respond to natural or man-made disasters and terrorist attacks. It will provide a vital tool for first responders and further secure America’s homeland. We know that when disaster strikes, minutes matter. We also know the most effective way to save lives is to keep people out of impacted areas and efficiently evacuate those who are affected.”
The legislation would establish a network to transmit emergency alerts across a broad variety of communications systems, including those of cell-phone operators. It woudl also provide federal, state and local emergency managers with the ability to send out geographically targeted alerts to the communities at risk; establish a grant program to help remote communities that lack quality telecommunications infrastructure install sirens and other devices so they can still get warnings about threats; and provide at least $106 million to research, develop and deploy technologies and equipment to operate these alert systems.
A similar bill was introduced in the House by Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.).
The FCC, which has been studying EAS reform for two years, could unveil new rules for an expanded EAS system at its Sept. 26 meeting. The existing emergency warning regulations are largely subject to voluntary participation and predominantly depend on radio, television and cable TV. Policy-makers have yet to tap into other communications channels, such as those serving hundreds of millions of mobile-phone and Internet users. Whether the FCC will keep EAS voluntary, or move to a mandatory approach as suggested by ranking House telecom subcommittee member Edward Markey (D-Mass.), is unclear. Also in question is how small and rural wireless carriers would be treated under any new federal mandate on EAS.
DHS, whose officials joined representatives from the European Union and New York City at a successful demonstration of cell-broadcast EAS technology last week in Amsterdam, is moving forward with its own emergency alert pilot project. The project involves public TV operators, wireless operators and others.
Indeed, FEMA, a DHS unit anxious to restore its credibility after its mangled response to Hurricane Katrina last year, could upstage the FCC by soon announcing that an EAS solution exists for cellular carriers in the form of cell broadcast technology. In coming months, perhaps as early as October, cell broadcast EAS is scheduled to go operational in Appleton, Wis., and in other markets.
Cell broadcast technology has yet to catch on with the four national mobile-phone carriers in the United States. But that could change as homeland security officials—bolstered by President Bush’s June executive order to shift some emergency warning responsibilities to DHS—move more aggressively to negotiate with Cingular Wireless L.L.C., Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel Corp. and T-Mobile USA Inc. on getting an EAS solution in place.
The cell-phone industry, which worked with the government to develop and implement wireless priority service after 9/11, is concerned about liability and the impact of yet another federal mandate on the use of spectrum carriers paid billions of dollars to acquire.
However, under the cell broadcast model, the government would pay wireless carriers for access to airtime in exchange for the ability to reach some or all of the country’s 200-plus million mobile-phone subscribers in a timely manner when emergency or disaster strikes.
Another big obstacle is the lack of consensus in industry on a long-term technology solution for a wireless emergency alerts.
