Wednesday, May 28, 2003 Federal Communications Commission

1. Wednesday, May 28, 2003 Federal Communications Commission

2. Communications, Infrastructure Security, Access and Restoration Working Group Bruce Allan, Chairman

3. Communications Infrastructure Charter of the Working Group • Address the risks and vulnerabilities of our nation's television, radio, multi-channel video, microwave, and satellite infrastructure in the event of terrorist attack,natural disaster or other manmade catastrophe • Assess current security and restoration capabilitiesto identify best practices, needed enhancements,and recommended changes • Review current media infrastructure redundancywithin and between each industry segment • Evaluate the impact of digital technology on security, infrastructure redundancy, and service restoration

4. Working Group Organization • Task Forces Chair • Prevention Glenn Reitmeier, NBC • Restoration Bob Seidel, CBS • Future Technologies/ Ira Goldstone, Tribune • Digital Solutions

5. Jun-02 Sep-02 Dec-02 Mar-03 Jun-03 Sep-03 Dec-03 NationalReview RegionalReview DefineWork Plan MetropolitanReview Prevention DevelopRestorationPlan Document Current RestorationCapabilities/Deficiencies EvaluateRedundancy Restoration Review Digital LandscapeIdentify Issues/Solutions Digital DesignSurvey FinalizeRecommendations Solutions Work Group Aug 7Cinti Dec 11Wash March 19Cinti June 18Wash Sept 17Cinti Dec 10Wash Meetings Chairman's Monthly Conference Calls Meetings Task Force Scheduled by Task Force Chairs Meetings Working Group Calendar

6. Prevention Task Force: Gathering Data Survey through industry associations Directly contact organizations National Regional Local Broadcast TV Cable TV Radio DBS SatelliteRadio

7. Prevention Task Force Industry Surveys: • Created with substantial industry associationinput and cooperation • Survey conducted and tabulated by industry associations: • SBCA: April, 2003 distributed • NCTA: April, 2003 distributed • APTS: May, 2003 distributed • NAB: May, 2003 distributed • Next step: result tabulation & assessment

8. Prevention Task Force Recommendations: • Media companies vulnerability assessments should include: • The possibility of deliberate attacks • Natural disasters • Equipment failures and take appropriate measures toprevent loss of service and to expedite rapid recovery • System redundancies and their geographic distribution should be considered as response elements in media vulnerability assessments • During government-declared emergency conditions,news networks should consider the possibility of abackup carriage plan with other non-news networksto gain cost-effective additional geographic diversity

9. Prevention Task Force Recommendations: The role of commercial communications satellites as the predominant means of national signal distribution suggests that the security practices for these facilities be examined Local media should have a vulnerability assessment and disaster recovery plan and subject it to periodic review, update and practice The scenario of widespread power outages should be considered a element of vulnerability assessments and cooperative response plans. In such a scenario, the importance of radio increases because of its ability to reach battery powered and automotive receivers

10. Restoration Task Force • Capability Assessments: • Surveys designed to determine restoration timelines for different sectors • Develop a cost-benefit analysis for short,medium and long term recovery plans • Validate restoration best practices

11. Future Technologies/Digital Solutions Task Force MCAP Rationale: • Digital technology offers inherent enhancements in speed, robustnessand flexibility in delivery of content • These enhancements should be embraced and enabled as the current EAS system or other new emergency information systems evolve • A standards-based protocol that serves asa common technical platform for all digitalsystems is an important first step

12. Future Technologies/Digital Solutions Task Force MCAP Key Attributes: • Addressability: national, regional and local • Scaleability: support variable and dynamically changing bit rates • Interoperability: easily transported withinexisting digital media systems • Prioritizing: automatic based on alert level

13. Future Technologies/Digital Solutions Task Force Audience Digital Output Device Digital Transport • Average Citizen • Impaired/Disabled • Non-English Consumer Point to Multipoint Digital Broadcast (DTV, Digital Radio) Satellite (TV/Radio) Digital Cable Television Radio Set Top Boxes News Wire Service PC First Responder Devices Wireless Devices Display MCAP Display or Data Media • First Responders • Local Government • Law Enforcement • EMS

14. Future Technologies/Digital Solutions Task Force • Once the MCAP is defined, industry organizations and companies will havean important role in progressing to implementation, by developing standardsand specifications for carriage of MCAPon various media • We will continue to identify organizationsto add to the following list that will be helpfulin advancing the MCAP:

15. Future Technologies/Digital Solutions Task Force

16. Future Technologies/Digital Solutions Task Force Recommendation: • Government should coordinate developmentof a Media Common Alert Protocol (MCAP) • MCAP defined as: • Protocol to deliver emergency messagesvia digital networks • Protocol that flows over all methods of digital transport and can be received by all digital receivers • Protocol that is optimized for point-to-multi-point networks and devices only

17. Public Communications & Safety Working Group John Eck, Chairman

18. Outline • Working Group • Mission • Organization • Membership • Best Practice Recommendations

19. Public Communications & SafetyCharter of the Working Group • Address issues relating to public communications and safety in response to physical attacks and natural disasters. • Means by which government and media communicate emergency and public safety information to the general population, including but not limited to the Emergency Alert System. • Consider any special requirements needed to communicate such information to the hearing and visually impaired. Ensure consistent, reliable and accurate communication among the Media, Government and the Public When a Public Safety Emergency is Declared

20. Top-Level Issues • Who is the public?… Everyone, including: • Visually Impaired • Hearing Impaired • Non-English speaking • Many key decisions are Government responsibility (weather/natural disaster alerts provide some best practices) • Need for a message • What the message is • Who it needs to be delivered to • When it needs to be delivered (perhaps in prioritized order) • Effective execution requires pre-planning and training of Government, Media and Public

21. PC&S Working Group Organization Govt:Public Govt:Media Media:Media Media:Public What is govt’s message to the public? How does gov’t get its message to the media? How do media cooperate? How does media reach all people? Broadcast TV new alternatives Cable TV EAS message Radio Radio & TV = Sound & Visual Web

22. Working Group Leadership Chairs Sub-Committee Gov’t : Public Thomas Fitzpatrick (Giuliani Partners) Gov’t : Media Ann Arnold (Texas Assoc. of Broadcasters) Media : Media Dave Barrett / Fred Young (Hearst-Argyle) Media : Public Mike Starling (NPR) & Joe Bruns (WETA) Organized Around Process & Stakeholders

23. Broad Working Group Participation • Leading Media Companies • ABC/Disney, CBS/Viacom, Fox, NBC, PBS • Radio One, Clear Channel radio, NPR • Hearst-Argyle, Tribune, Telemundo, Univision, WETA, WNET • DirecTV, EchoStar, Time-Warner Cable • Industry Associations • NAB, APTS, NCTA, CTIA, CEA, TAB • Government and Emergency Responders • FCC, FEMA, NWS/NOAA • Fire Chiefs, Police Chiefs, Nat’l Sheriff’s Assoc, Intl Assoc of Emergency Mgrs • California OES, Florida Emergency Mgmt • Public Interest Groups • Partnership for Public Warning, Org of Chinese Americans • Am. Found for the Blind, National Captioning Inst., League for Hard of Hearing • Technology & Process Experts • Microsoft, Panasonic • Giuliani Partners, Booz Allan Hamilton

24. Introduction Timely delivery of warnings and public safety information can save lives Media production and delivery companies play a major role in delivering risk communications and warnings to citizens at risk • Capability to educate and inform the public • Ongoing real time coverage of events • Critical role in the Emergency Alert System

25. Best Practices Framework • Establishing Responsibility • Public / Private Partnership • Joint Plans and Processes • Coordinated Industry Action • Emergency Alert System (EAS) • New Technology • Promoting “Best Practices”

26. Establishing Responsibility 1. A single Federal entity should be responsible: • effective public communications capabilities and procedures • lead responsibilities established • national, uniform, all-hazard risk communication process • Language diversity • People with Disabilities (incl. sensory) Implement a National, Uniform, All-Hazard Risk Communication Warning Process From a Public and Private Consensus

27. Public / Private Partnership 2. A public / private partnership should make coordinated use of mass media and other dissemination systems. Best Use of All Available Resources

28. Thanks • Working Group chairpersons • Working Group members • FCC staff • This is only a beginning • Framework for future best practices Challenge Going Forward – energizing state and local level collaboration among media and government

29. Joint Plans & Processes  3. Local and State governments and the media should cooperate to create, review and update emergency communications procedures 3.1 Effective use of current, emerging, and legacy systems 3.2 Local media - key participants in communications and warning plans  3.3 Federal and local agencies - work with the media 3.4 Local media - assist government - create and deliver public education 3.5 Presentation guidelines – be sure that all emergency delivery systems work well together 3.6 Regular testing and rehearsals Joint Planning & Execution

30. Coordinated Industry Action 4. Local media should form cooperatives to deliver government emergency messages in a coordinated way to all constituencies in the community. 4.1 Local media pools for risk communication and warning 4.1.1 Consider a single media point of contact 4.2 Media and government should agree to take pre-planned actions upon authenticated notice 4.2.1 Local and state emergency communication committees should plan well coordinated community responses 4.2.2 Local media should coordinate activities to reach multiple language and disabled constituencies 4.3 Activities / roles appropriate to local conditions under various failure scenarios should be created, developed, rehearsed and tested 4.3.1 Plans should account for widespread power outages, when radio can communicate to battery powered receivers Coordinated media actions amplify government messages

31. EAS • The Emergency Alert System should be periodically tested, upgraded as necessary, implemented and maintained. 5.1 Uniformly implemented with the latest EAS codes 5.2 Update State and local EAS plans - with broadcasters and cable operators 5.3 Wired and wireless paths to EAS entry points should be in good working order 5.4 Primary Entry Point system should be in good working order EAS Can Be Used Effectively

32. New Technology • Research into alternative, redundant and/or supplemental means of communicating emergency information to the public should be accelerated. 6.1 Expand government partnership with media, consumer electronics and computer industries 6.1.1 Explore emerging technologies – existing infrastructures and new ones New Technology Can Improve Capabilities

33. Promoting Best Practices 7.Local jurisdiction/market cooperatives should be encouraged to share their locally developed best practices Significant Gains achieved through People & Process

34. Concluding Remarks • Thanks • Working Group chairpersons • Working Group members • FCC staff • This is only a beginning • Framework for future best practices Challenge Going Forward – energizing state and local level collaboration among media and government

35. Wednesday, May 28, 2003 Federal Communications Commission