FCC Seeks to Understand Implementation of Proposed Multilingual EAS, While Nationwide EAS NPRM Circulates
A public notice proceeding on whether to establish an emergency alert system process for multilingual broadcast alerts aims to find a consensus, FCC officials said. The concept of establishing a broadcaster as a “designated hitter” to transmit EAS messages for non-English stations knocked off-air stemmed from a Minority Media and Telecommunications Council petition (CD March 13 p10). Circulating, meanwhile, is a Public Safety Bureau NPRM on issues that were identified after the first nationwide EAS test, the officials said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The EAS NPRM circulating at the FCC is a set-up for a second nationwide EAS test, an FCC official said. It proposes rules on use of a national location code, better use of the national periodic test code and other issues, the official said. The NPRM asks whether using a national location code requires equipment upgrades, another FCC official said. Some state emergency entities and smaller cable operators expressed the need for more guidance on equipment use and audio accessibility before a second test is conducted (CD May 22 p6).
One of the problems with the MMTC multilingual EAS petition involves clarity on the exact solution that’s being proposed, an FCC official said. It isn’t clear how MMTC wants some of the relief it’s requesting implemented, an official said. The devil is going to be in the details on whether there’s consensus around a specific way to get multilingual alerts out, the official said. Up through the highest level, everybody wants people to be able to receive and understand alerts, the official said.
In initial comments, state broadcaster associations from all 50 states supported the designated hitter concept on a voluntary basis without an FCC mandate (CD May 30 p10). State broadcasters agree with the goal of the MMTC proposal, but would oppose an FCC order that directs markets to have multilingual EAS alerts broadcast irrespective of the state or local emergency management policies, said Richard Zaragoza, a Pillsbury attorney who represents the associations in the proceeding. The associations support the concept of station licensees choosing voluntarily to enter into formal or informal arrangements with one another to determine on a voluntary, case-by-case basis which station serves as the “designated hitter,” they said (http://bit.ly/TXH6eS). There shouldn’t be an FCC mandate identifying which markets should have multilingual EAS information broadcast, without input and decision-making from emergency management officials, Zaragoza said.
State broadcaster associations haven’t endorsed an FCC mandate, but it seems they've endorsed the concept, said David Honig, MMTC executive director. “They're not where we would like them to be.” But it’s a hopeful sign that they've seen the wisdom of the concept, he said.
The FCC probably would rather not mandate this type of effort, Zaragoza said. The FCC should oversee a process where state and local authorities work with their broadcasters toward a solution, he said. The FCC should develop a true, nationwide and in-depth consensus so everybody’s working in the same direction, he said. It would like to “take credit for using the leverage it has over broadcast licenses to reach a goal that probably most people agree with,” he said. Many organizations and agencies play a role in this, he said. MMTC’s proposal puts the effort in the hands of the broadcasters and “doesn’t reflect a partnership with state and local emergency management people,” he said. Replies in docket 04-296 are due Thursday.