After much discussion and concern regarding the continuing problems with EAS in Los Angeles,  the following individuals have weighed in on EAS and its difficulties.

From Burt Weiner:

EAS is too complex to be reliable.  The present EAS system is an overly complicated system and most of us know that the more complicated a system is the more it's prone to failure. In addition, it seems to me that the test originators are not as dedicated as most of the broadcast engineers in making it work. The present EAS system, in my opinion, is ill-conceived.

Burt Weiner, K6OQK, Email
Burt I. Weiner & Associates.
Los Angeles

Bob Gonsett contacted Oscar Medina, who heads the San Diego EAS program, and inquired about the relative success of EAS in San Diego.

Bob wrote, "Why does EAS appear to work fairly well in  San Diego, but not so well in Los Angeles?   You have headed up the San Diego EAS program  for years, and I don't see many complaints about  the EAS system on the San Diego EAS list server.  Why is this so?    I am under the impression that the L.A. County  Sheriffs Office repeatedly fails to originate EAS  tests correctly, and that this failure accounts for  perhaps 90% of the problems in L.A.  Then again, perhaps I'm missing something, so I'd like to hear your thoughts."

Oscar's reply is as follows:

I've noticed the problems that seem to plague Los Angeles EAS.  Without looking at their process in detail it is difficult for me to determine where the problem or problems originate.

Our EAS process is loosely based on the system I helped develop for the eight counties in the West Texas, Southern New Mexico operational area.  Our local plan places responsibility for activating EAS with the individuals most qualified to make that decision. For example, CARE alerts are originated by the San Diego Sheriff's Department, weather alerts are originated by National Weather Service, and civil emergency notifications are originated by the Office of Emergency Services. Any organization or government official requesting an activation must submit their request through the appropriate authorized agency.

So much for content . . . .

EAS is also highly technical in nature and requires knowledge of how EAS equipment functions and what steps are necessary to create an EAS message (test or activation), and to send it via the encoder.  Our process places responsibility for actually programming the EAS encoder on personnel who do that for a living, the operators at the LP-1 and LP-2s.  By dividing up responsibility in this manner, our plan allows each agency to do their part to the best of their ability and training. This eliminates many problems that could arise if a local government agency were responsible for actually programming an EAS event into their encoder.

Our system functions as a "filtered" system. All EAS activations are filtered through the appropriate agency before being sent to the LP-1.  The LP-1 also filters activation requests prior to activating EAS. This filtering tends to eliminate unnecessary or improperly prepared activations.  Tests are originated by operators at the LP-1 who are used to working with this type of equipment.

Overall, I am pleased with how well our process functions. San Diego EAS is effective due to the participation and support provided by Clear Channel Communications, local radio and television broadcasters, all three major cable companies, and the FCC. In large part, San Diego EAS operates smoothly due to the efforts of key individuals like Bill Thompson (Clear Channel),  June Gonzales (FCC),  Captain Lori Bird (San Diego Sheriff's Department),  Jim Phelps (Office of Emergency Services), and Edwin Clark (National Weather Service).

I thank them all for their efforts and support.

Oscar Medina,
Chairman
San Diego EAS
Website: http://sandiegophotos.org/eas/

From KFI's John Paoli:

The San Diego plan is very good because it works, and everyone seems comfortable with it. I do not, however, believe that a radio station board operator should be put in the position of second guessing civil authorities. The liability exposure boggles the mind. Please correct me if I've misinterpreted the plan.

I do believe that no message should be forwarded without previewing it. The operator should, and must, observe that the header, attention signal, message, and EOM are intact and valid. That goes without saying. That is the practice in place at KFI. If the EAS package is defective it must be aborted.

We had this problem with numerous truncated AMBER alerts from CHP last October. The operator previewed the messages, determined that they were defective and deleted them. The problem was so severe, that I contacted CHP ENTAC, directly.

I want to believe that the May RMT failure was born out of the best intentions by LASD. That is, the testing of two EAS origination points on alternate months.

I do believe that LASD has the ability to perform reliably and consistently. I do not believe that the operation of the EAS equipment is beyond them.

I don't believe that broadcasters should originate EAS messages. The reason for the RMT is to prove that we have the ability to forward messages originated by civil authorities. Originating the RMT at the LP-1 for aesthetic reasons would seem to dilute the purpose.

In two emails (to different recipients), I've requested that the practice of alternating RMT origination points be discontinued, and challenged LASD to transition to a "zero defects" mode of EAS operation.

EAS in Los Angeles works. Recent emergency messages have been forwarded successfully, with good results. Tests exist to find weakness or flaws in a system. Last week we discovered a big flaw. Remedial action has been requested and a challenge has been issued.

An amazing paradigm shift has occurred in law enforcement. Since the passage of AB415 and the governor's AMBER order, law enforcement is directed, by law, to seek out the assistance of the media, broadcast media specifically, in the case of EAS activation. It needs to work for them, and us.

We test again June 24th at 4:35am. I'm confident that there will be a significant improvement. I expect to build on that improvement July 29th at 10:35am.

I respect the concerns and observations of my colleagues on this list. It's a privilege to be offered this forum.

Now it's your turn. I want us to be able to have a way of reaching every station and cable system operator in our area in the event of a test failure, notification, update, etc. We currently have the LA_EAS_LECC list, the SBELA list, and The Communicator. For routine items with seven day lead times I'd think that a post to all three would work. I'd like to have a facility in place where we could communicate in near real time on EAS issues. If the LA_EAS_LECC list sounds good to everyone, great. Let's get a consensus.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Let's maintain an open dialogue.

John Paoli, Email
Chief Engineer
KFI/KLAC/KXTA Studio/Ardmore Facility
Los Angeles

P.S. Since my last post, I've spoken to LASD. I'll be meeting with SCC, EOB, and the new LASD AMBER coordinator the week of June 16th. I'll provide The CGC Communicator with developments coming out of that meeting.

Follow up from John Paoli on June 9, 2003:

In the last week we've had two Statewide AMBER activations by CHP ENTAC. The first was Monday 6/2. There were problems with the content and formatting of the message. KFI did not forward it for those reasons.

This past Friday night at 22:10 CHP ENTAC requested another activation for the abduction in San Jose. KFI forwarded this message at 22:23. KFWB evidently forwarded our message at 22:43. It appears that this activation was successful in LA County.

There were some aesthetic issues with the alert we received, but we corrected what we could and forwarded the alert.

This afternoon I had a very constructive conversation with CHP about the problems surrounding these recent activations. CHP is going to check the equipment and training at the locations involved.

The meeting with LASD is still scheduled for later this month. Vacations at LASD are keeping us from getting together sooner.

Provided by Earthsignals.com