Wireless Industry Alert & Warning Working Group Presentation

1. Wireless IndustryAlert & Warning Working Group Presentation Steve Carlson Carlson Associates CA Government Affairs Counsel September 2008

2. The Wireless Industry: Subs, Competition, Usage & Investment • Subs: More than 150 wireless companies serve more than 262 million subscribers in the U.S., over 25 million in California. The nationwide wireless penetration rate is approximately 80 percent. • Competition: • More than 95% of the U.S. population lives in areas with at least three wireless providers competing to offer service; More than 50% of the population lives in areas with at least five competing providers. • 4 nationwide (Tier 1) licensed wireless service providers; 10 regional / “super-regional” (Tier 2) licensed wireless service providers; More than 140 smaller (Tier 3) licensed wireless service providers; Multiple MVNOs • New entry / expansion occurring as a result of new licenses (AWS, 700 MHz) being auctioned. • Usage: More than 20 million U.S. telephone households (17 percent) are “wireless substitutors”- homes without landlines that rely solely on a mobile phone for their home telecommunications. 59 percent of U.S. cord cutters have household incomes of $40,000 or less. • Wireless licensees invest an average of $25 billion a year. Source: FCC 12th Competition Report (2008); The Neilson Company (September 2008); CTIA.

3. Wireless CommunicationsPublic Safety • Wireless E-911: With over 262 Million subscribers making 296,000 emergency 9-1-1 calls per day, wireless providers have invested in upgrading the hardware and software in their networks to ensure access to 9-1-1 services and deploy E-911 service. Wireless carriers have already received—and fulfilled—thousands of Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP) requests for Phase I and Phase II service, and are working actively with PSAPs to meet their needs. The wireless industry continues to participate in on-going physical end to end tests of Internet Protocol (IP) based services for 911 purposes by Columbia University, University of Texas and others • Industry Initiative: Wireless representatives have been actively participating in emergency preparedness working groups and standards bodies. Including, the National Security Telecommunication Advisory Committee (NSTAC), ATIS Emergency Service Interconnection Forum (ESIF), FCC Network Reliability & Interoperability Council (NRIC), the Commercial Mobile Alert Advisory Committee (CMAAC) and the NENA Standards Body & Next Generation Partners Program. Source: CTIA

4. Wireless Communications Barriers to Service Deployment & Emergency Response • Service Deployment Barriers: In order to deploy advanced services, including Broadband and emergency alert services, wireless carriers and public safety need adequate infrastructure. Due to significant delays in tower siting processes, CTIA filed a petition asking the FCC to require a “shot clock” for tower siting and zoning approvals. • During an Emergency, Wireless Services Require: • Restoring commercial power & underlying landline networks; • Stockpiling and then providing access to scarce resources, including fuel, water, ice, and food; • Gaining access to damaged areas by credentialing repair crews and convoys to get personnel and equipment into an affected area and securing escorts for employees where safety may be an issue; • Establishing a priority for communications by identifying wireless communications as a critical element of public safety.

5. Commercial Mobile Alert System (CMAS)Rules & Requirements • CMAS Classification • Presidential: “The President has issued an Emergency Alert. Check local media for more details.” • Imminent Threat:Urgent, Severe and Certain emergencies risk life or property • Child Abduction/AMBER Alerts: (1) Family Abduction, (2) Nonfamily Abduction, (3) Lost, Injured, or Otherwise Missing, and (4) Endangered Runaway • Providers that elect to transmit authenticated emergency alerts must deliver to their subscribers and those roaming on their networks. • County Level Geographic Targeting: Participating Commercial Mobile Alert service providers may target smaller areas if technologically feasible. • Source: FCC, Commercial Mobile Alert System, April 2008.

6. C CMS Provider Gateway A Proposed Government Administered Federal Agencies B D • CMS ProviderInfrastructure Alert Aggregator (FEMA) Local Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Alert Gateway Mobile Device E StateEOC CMAS:System Overview Steps to Initiate the CMAS A. Connection between the authorized alert initiator (i.e., Federal, state, tribal and local government agencies) and the Alert Aggregator (FEMA) which authenticates whether an alert initiation meets the “Imminent Threat” elements of Urgent, Severity and Certainty. Note: An authorized, credentialed official must initiate an alert to start the CMAS process. B. Connection between the Alert Aggregator and Alert Gateway. C. Connection between the Alert Gateway and the CMS Provider Gateway which requires common protocols to ensure secure and accurate alert information is transferred. D. Connection between the CMS Provider Gateway and the CMS provider infrastructure E. Connection between the CMS provider infrastructure and the mobile device which requires accurate, timely, and accessible alerts for the mobile device user. Source: FCC, Commercial Mobile Alert System, April 2008

7. CMAS: WARN Act Process Timeline

8. CMAS:FCC CMAS Deployment Timeline

9. CMAS:Timeline & Election • Timeline: Electing providers have 28 months to develop, test and deploy their systems after the Federal Alert Aggregator (FEMA) makes available the Government Interface Design specifications. Currently, standards groups are hammering out design and protocol specifications. • 10 Months to “Develop & Test” • 18 Months to “Deploy” and begin transmitting alerts • Electing: The nation’s largest wireless carriers including Alltel, AT&T, Leap, MetroPCS, Sprint, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular and Verizon Wireless, covering 97% of the U.S. population, have elected to participate in part depending on external factors, including equipment availability and development of the system that will be used by FEMA to transmit the alerts.

10. CMAS: The Role of State & Local Governments • Federal Emergency Management Agency: Asthe Alert Aggregator:(1) FEMA will interface with, but not interfere with, existing state and local alerting systems; (2) the states will be responsible for determining and identifying those persons who have the authority to send alerts for their specific jurisdictions; and (3) the federal Aggregator system will be engineered with DHS/Science and Technology scientists. • CMAS Alert Initiation: State and local governments must initiate the use of an “Imminent Threat” or “AMBER Alert” over the CMAS. Local procedures and protocols should be developed to ensure proper use of the CMAS. • State Compatibility & Implementation: As the Alert & Warning Working Group correctly notes, any state implementation of mobile alerting needs to be compatible with the CMAS and should allow the CMAS to be completed in an efficient and timely manner.

11. California Specific Issues • Wireless carriers have a long and positive relationship with emergency responders in California and throughout the nation and have contributed significantly to personal and public safety. • The CMAAC process has been successful because of the breadth of its participants-the right people and entities are making the decisions. The Alert and Warning Working Group mirrors that breadth in many ways and will be an important voice in state public policy on these issues. • The wireless industry looks forward to the successful completion of this process and to an ongoing relationship with working group members on important public safety issues.