FRIDAY - APRIL 7, 2006 - ISSUE NO. 207 |
Dear friends of Wireless Messaging, I hope you aren't getting tired of reading about Emergency Alerting. I am still fired up about the topic even though 9/11 is far behind us, and even though the hurricanes of last fall are starting to seem like a long time ago. I don't want to sound like a pessimist, but I wonder how many more disasters will have to happen before something gets done about alerting the public when they are in danger? The next Hurricane Katrina Panel meeting will be at the FCC headquarters in Washington in eleven more days.
The whole public notice is reproduced below. If anyone has a chance to go, it would be good to be there and "rub shoulders" with as many people as possible. Maybe you could take the battery out of your pager and show as many people around you as possible that an “AA” or an “A” disposable battery doesn't have to be recharged and in most pagers they last a whole month. This is what Vince Kelly did when he spoke at the last panel meeting, and I thought it was very effective. And speaking of USA Mobility, check out this very impressive graph just released:
Congratulations to USMO! Check out their news release following below. The following article on Emergency Alerting —focusing on cell phones—restated the old truism, “To be forewarned is to be fore-armed.” I had missed the article in RCR Wireless News, until it was recommended by a friend. Now I can recommend it to you. The goal for Emergency Alerting should be to converge all federal warning systems into an integrated network along with all commercial wireless devices. I believe the best way to make this happen is for the commercial wireless carriers to partner with the government. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and that is mine. Now on to more news and views. |
A new issue of The Wireless Messaging Newsletter gets posted on the web each week. A notification goes out by e-mail to subscribers on most Fridays around noon central US time. The notification message has a link to the actual newsletter on the Internet. That way it doesn't fill up your incoming e-mail account. There is no charge for subscription and there are no membership restrictions. Readers are a very select group of wireless industry professionals, and include the senior managers of many of the world's major Paging and Wireless Data companies. There is an even mix of operations managers, marketing people, and engineers—so I try to include items of interest to all three groups. It's all about staying up-to-date with business trends and technology. I regularly get reader's comments, so this newsletter has become a community forum for the Paging, and Wireless Data communities. You are welcome to contribute your ideas and opinions. Unless otherwise requested, all correspondence addressed to me is subject to publication in the newsletter and on my web site. I am very careful to protect the anonymity of those who request it. NOTE: This newsletter is best viewed at screen resolutions of 800x600 (good) or 1024x768 (better). Any current revision of web browser should work fine. Please notify me of any problems with viewing. This site is compliant with XHTML 1.0 transitional coding for easy access from wireless devices. (XML 1.0/ISO 8859-1.) MORE PAGES |
Wireless: Tomorrow’s emergency-alert system
Mar 31, 2006
![]() Jeff Silva |
The global war on terrorism and natural disasters here and abroad are forcing policymakers to rethink—and redesign—public warning systems that take advantage of wireless and other technologies used by billions of people around the world today. The undertaking involves a mix of technological, legal and public policy issues. In an exclusive interview with RCR Wireless News D.C. Bureau Chief Jeff Silva, Mark Wood, a former engineer at L.M. Ericsson and currently honorary secretary of the Cellular Emergency Alert Systems Association International, agreed to field questions from RCR Wireless News on the challenges and promise of wireless emergency-alert technology.
RCR: Mark, explain your role at CEASa International. What other hats do you wear in connection with emergency-alert modernization?
![]() Mark Wood |
Wood: I am the Honorary Secretary of the International Cellular Emergency Alert Services Association. My role is to coordinate the efforts of the like-minded teams from all over the world, all of whom share the common vision of putting cell broadcasting to the service of public safety. We are a not-for-profit foundation with a mission to save lives.
In addition to this role I also serve on the Working Group on Emergency Telecommunications, run by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, as a technical adviser. My role there is to look ahead at the emerging mobile technologies and try to predict how they will behave in disasters, and how they can be put into the service of the Humanitarian Agenda. It was while studying with this group that I realized the importance of cell broadcasting. I also serve as contributing editor of the ITU Handbook on Emergency Telecommunications, and serve the British Red Cross as an Emergency IT & Telecom Project Officer, and recently served as a UN humanitarian telecommunications coordinator during the Iraq war. My day job is as a freelance consultant on emergency communications and cell broadcasting.
RCR: How do you think the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in United States and the 2004 Indonesian tsunami changed the way government policy-makers, industry and citizens view public warning?
Wood: There is no doubt in my mind that 9/11 and the tsunami changed everything in public warning. The International Red Cross says, “Disaster is hazard multiplied by vulnerability.” So you see that small changes in the vulnerability of people makes a big reduction in the scale of the effects of the disaster on people. To be forewarned is to be fore-armed, so warning is a very effective way to reduce vulnerability and thus disaster.
All over the world, governments, policy-makers and citizens groups are looking again at an area that used to be a “Cinderella” of emergency management. In this instant-information age, citizens expect timely and accurate information from the government. If the government doesn't come forth with information, then people doubt if they are really still in charge and start to look for their own solutions. Unreasonable or not, citizens expect snappy instructions even when all communications have collapsed.
The tsunami showed us that the tsunami alarm warns a dozen scientists, but is unable to make the “last mile” trip to the guy on the beach who needs the information. And let’s not forget, he is the one who paid for the warning system. Voters can and do ruthlessly punish governments that give them tardy, inaccurate or useless information. This is a voting-booth issue and that’s why governments are revising their capabilities.
RCR: Mark, how would you characterize the state of emergency warning service in the United States and abroad? What developments and benchmarks do you see for 2006 and beyond?
Wood: Look, I know it’s fashionable to criticize American public-safety right now, but there are very few governments that can brag about something like EAS [Emergency Alert Service]. It’s true that the present warning systems would have been recognized by President Truman, but it’s always the case that investment follows citizen concerns, which is why Congress is discussing spending serious money on public warning in a more serious way than they have before.
Right now the state of the art is sirens, NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] radio, EAS and public-service announcements over broadcast radio and TV, sometimes using scrolling text. Sirens have short ranges, so they are a fairly expensive solution because you need lots of them to cover a town. They also don’t carry much information other than, “You should be more stressed than you are now.” I heard a siren going off in the earthquake- and tsunami-prone Kobe, Japan, one morning, and had no idea what to do next. On the plus side they are independent, reliable, robust— and you don’t need any fancy terminals to receive the warning, so they are socially flat. Citizens would then turn on the radio for more detailed instructions. Many hazard-prone states lavish loving care on their maintenance.
NOAA radio system is a very fine and well-engineered VHF radio network which can be applied to public warning. It brings authentic and detailed information to the public, but has the disadvantage that it can only reach those who have had the foresight to purchase a NOAA radio receiver, and turn it on. A further problem is that it is not usual for people to carry the radio around when they leave the house, unless they have an expectation of a severe event. Interestingly, the 1951 CONELRAD system was used to command broadcasters to switch off their stations, preventing enemy bombers from homing in— but also preventing the public from getting any information! The much-better 1963 Emergency Broadcast System [EBS] took the opposite approach and had a hierarchical structure of passing information to public broadcast stations from authenticated information providers such as the National Weather Service. It was further authenticated by a “10-bell alarm” system carried over UPI teletype networks. It was used some 20,000 times until superseded by the EAS service in 1997.
EAS uses a network of encoders and decoders putting the message in standard digital form called the SAME protocol, which can trigger broadcast stations’ decoders and thus create public warning messages, or have station announcers do that by voice or an inserted text box. You should know by the way that broadcasters are always very nervous about handing over their airwaves to anyone else and usually prefer to announce for themselves.
Radio and TV broadcasts can reach people wherever they are, and on very large mass scales. There is the ability to explain the situation at length, so broadcasters and, in particular, journalists will always have an important role in disaster mitigation. The problem is that with our present lifestyles we are not always watching TV and radio, so we need something more obtrusive to get us to go there for more information.
For example, I did not know about the London bombings (July 7, 2005) for three hours because I was working on my computer and not listening to the radio. The Red Cross could not reach me because the mobile-phone system was jammed, so I knew nothing until I phoned the police on an unrelated routine matter, only to be told that they were trying to get to me for hours. The United Kingdom has nothing like EAS, but does have something like EBS.
In 2004, the FCC published a notice of intended rulemaking prior to revising the EAS system. A new and more capable protocol called Common Alert Protocol is now being widely deployed. Money is being spent to include new digital terrestrial and satellite TV and radio stations into the mix. Some of these technologies will have geo specificity and alerting facilities, but many of the old drawbacks still apply.
RCR: How do wireless technologies fit into the mix? Could you briefly describe which wireless emergency-alert technologies are under consideration? And what are their advantages and drawbacks?
Wood: As one Houston sheriff put it, “You can’t hardly find anyone who doesn't have a mobile phone these days.” There are billions of mobiles in use all over the world and we would be just plain negligent if we didn't bend over backward to find a way to put all that power to the use of the humanitarian agenda. The citizen buys the phone at his expense, keeps it charged up and with him at all times.
The main bearers under consideration are SMS and cell broadcasting. SMS has the advantage of being carried on the control channels and not the traffic channels. During overloads, control channels have priority over traffic channels and so SMS messages have a much better chance of getting through than voice announcements.
Cell broadcasting has the advantage that it is carried on a separate control channel and is not affected by traffic channel congestion at all. In addition, it does not cause any congestion because it does not use traffic or control channels to work. Whereas SMS message delivery is preceded by a full call set-up procedure— which needs the help of the mobility management servers, GMSC [gateway mobile switching center], HLR [home location register], VLR [visitor location register], MSC [mobile switching center] and finally large BSC [base station controller] paging load—cell broadcasting does not create any demands on the system at all. Therefore, it can reach an unlimited number of subscribers in 20 seconds without causing the network to crash in its hour of stress.
Even better, no disaster manager wants millions running in panic, blocking the highways and running out of gas and water. Cell broadcasting can target specific towers or groups of towers, so you can tell this neighborhood to evacuate, but that neighborhood that it is safer to stay where they are for now. Cell broadcast is, in my opinion, the “magic bullet” for the citizen, the emergency manager and the network; we would be nuts to miss this trick and we are not going to.
RCR: What needs fixing in emergency-alert systems other than technology?
Wood: It seems clear to me that no one delivery method will be the final one-size-fits-all solution. Rather, a whole range of different technologies will be needed in order to reach the population. There will need to be significant harmonization of at least the information-provider sources and authentication regimes. This is why CEASa is supporting the creation of the U.S. Trust Protocol Board, which will facilitate the interests of all the stakeholders in the proposed cell-broadcast solution. I am glad to say that some progress is being made on this matter, but we can’t afford to let turf wars break out and prevent progress.
RCR: What roles do government and industry play in emergency alert reform? What are the biggest obstacles to improving emergency alert options?
Wood: Since society chose to deregulate telecom, there are now two types of telecom companies: Those who ruthlessly keep their eyes on the bottom line, and those going out of business. I believe that we need to be respectful of this situation if we are to gain the trust of the networks. It also means that it is not fair to expect telecom businesses to take the lead in emergency information provision. Government, on the other hand, has both the mandate and the legal powers to provide information and demand action of citizens. We will need a government-to-citizen relationship working through telecom service providers, but each with its own needs.
CEASa is supportive of the set up of “Trust Protocol Boards,” which consist of a steering committee of stakeholders in this enterprise. Citizens need to know that they can trust the message to be authentic. Networks need to be sure that their customers won’t be driven off the network by spam, junk mail or hoax messages. Networks will also want to be compensated for the use the spectrum which is in their care. Governments will need to be sure that the system is working and has the capability that they require in an emergency. The Trust Protocol Board will facilitate MoUs [memorandums of understanding] and contracts that will satisfy all stakeholders. Importantly, there needs to be an independent watchdog that monitors the performance of the system and is able to report to the board if anything needs attention.
RCR: Einstein PCS, a GSM wireless unit of Airadigm Communications, successfully tested a cell-broadcast technology in 2004 and 2005 in Appleton, Wis. Appleton is expected to be part of a multi-city group that offers emergency warning function to subscribers in the near future. Do you believe Appleton, Wis., which is implementing a cell-broadcast alert system, will become a wireless emergency alert model for the rest of the United States? If so, how?
Wood: The Einstein network in Appleton, Wisconsin, has shown remarkable foresight and acute business acumen in this regard. I believe that cell broadcasting will be a success only if it is a commercial success. Information providers and networks and terminal makers will need to have the incentive to maintain and develop the feature. In fact there is considerable variation in the terminal behavior at the moment.
One of the problems with CB [Cell Broadcast] is that there is no call-data record, so no billing. The best way to charge for the service is from the sender of the information. Therefore, we need to have middleware that can assess the load that the message has caused on the network, and convert that into charging. Now that we have done that, we can create a commercially sustainable program whereby commercial messaging compensates the network for use of their infrastructure.
We are interested in a win-win program where everyone gains added value in the chain.
Source: RCR Wireless News
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PAGING CARRIERS |
| ||||||||||
AAPC BULLETIN |
FEATURED ADVERTISERS SUPPORTING THE NEWSLETTER |
AQUIS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
Engineering Services
Special Projects
Expense Reduction Services
|
| ||||||||
Wireless Messaging Software
| Newsletter repair prices—starting at:
**Special pricing on cellular and pager refurbishment**
Ask for Special Newsletter Pricing. Please call: (800) 222-6075 ext. 306 for pricing.
|
Advertise Here
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DON’T WAIT FOR THE NEXT SATELLITE OUTAGE Allow us to uplink your paging data to two separate satellites for complete redundancy! CVC owns and operates two separate earth stations and specializes in uplink services for paging carriers. Join our list of satisfied uplink customers.
For inquires please call or e-mail Stephan Suker at 800-696-6474 or steves@cvcpaging.com |
Want to help the newsletter? Become a SPONSOR
|
When every second counts, manage them effectively. Messaging Business Opportunity Supplement your existing business by launching this new AssistSTAR message distribution management system. Increase your revenue without purchasing a lot of new infrastructure, by starting out with a subscription service on existing equipment. What is AssistSTAR? Subscription-based AssistSTAR to start Server-based solutions when you are ready Time-critical response When every second counts, manage them effectively. You are invited to view our emerging case study presentation by clicking here.
|
![]()
SEE WEB FOR COMPLETE LIST:
|
WIRELESS MESSAGING NEWS |
USA Mobility Reports Preliminary 2005 Operating Results
First Year Marked by Successful Merger Integration, Repayment of Debt and Return of Capital to Shareholders
ALEXANDRIA, Va., April 3, 2006 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX News Network/—USA Mobility, Inc. (Nasdaq: USMO), a leading provider of wireless messaging services, today announced preliminary and unaudited operating results for the fourth quarter and year ended December 31, 2005, its first full year of operations following the merger between Arch Wireless, Inc. and Metrocall Holdings, Inc. on November 16, 2004.
The company announced on March 31, 2006 that it delayed the filing of its 2005 Form 10-K and its amended Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2004, and amended Form 10-Q/A's for the three interim quarterly periods for 2004 and 2005. The delay was the result of unforeseen time requirements in connection with completing its restatements of income taxes and deferred tax assets for the years 2003 and 2004, and interim periods of 2004 and 2005. The company is working diligently on completing this work and intends to file these statements as soon as practicable.
Upon completion of the audit and related filings, USA Mobility expects to report the following results: revenue of $618.6 million for 2005, with EBITDA of $155.9 million, or 25 percent of revenue; and operating income for 2005 of $2.5 million, as the company accelerated depreciation of the former Arch two-way paging system. Decommissioning of the system was completed in the fourth quarter of 2005. Additionally, the company recorded operating expenses in 2005 of $16.6 million for severance and contract termination costs associated with the integration of Arch and Metrocall.
The company said the merger integration, which is substantially complete, was the catalyst for significant improvements in 2005 operating results for the combined company.
Highlights of 2005 included:
"We made excellent progress in our first year following the merger," said Vincent D. Kelly, president and chief executive officer. "We substantially integrated the nation's two largest paging carriers, achieving significant synergies and operational costs savings." Kelly added: "In addition, while the paging and wireless messaging sector remains challenging, we were encouraged by the improvement in subscriber erosion during the year as well as the improving trends in the pace of revenue decline. As we move forward to complete the integration process and implement new sales and marketing initiatives in 2006, we anticipate even further financial and operational improvements that will allow us to better meet the needs of our customers nationwide."
Thomas L. Schilling, chief financial officer, said: "We continued to strengthen our financial position since the merger. We significantly reduced our operating costs, paid off $140 million in debt, paid out $41 million in dividends and ended the year with $37.5 million in cash, and expect to end first quarter of 2006 with a cash balance of approximately $73 million." Schilling also outlined the company's guidance for 2006, stating: "In 2006 the company expects revenue to be in a range from $480 million to $500 million, operating expenses, excluding depreciation and amortization, are expected to be in a range from $370 million to $380 million, and capital expenses in a range from $15 million to $20 million."
![]() | ![]() |
Source: USA Mobility, Inc. March 31, 2006 |
USA Mobility plans to host a conference call for investors on its fourth quarter and year-end results at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 4, 2006. The call-in number is 800-262-1292 (toll-free) or 719-457-2680 (toll). The pass code for the call is 4879478. A replay of the call will be available from 3:00 p.m. on April 4 until 11:59 p.m. on Tuesday, April 18, 2006. The replay number is 888-203-1112 (toll-free) or 719-457-0820 (toll). The pass code for the replay is 4879478.
About USA Mobility
USA Mobility, Inc., headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, is a leading provider of paging products and other wireless services to the business, government, healthcare and emergency response sectors. USA Mobility offers traditional one-way and advanced two-way paging via its nationwide networks covering more than 90% of the U.S. population. In addition, the company offers mobile voice and data services through Sprint Nextel and Cingular Wireless, including BlackBerry and GPS location applications. The company's product offerings include wireless connectivity systems for medical, business, government and other campus environments. USA Mobility focuses on the business-to-business marketplace and supplies mobile connectivity solutions to over two-thirds of the Fortune 1000 companies. For further information visit http://www.usamobility.com.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act: Statements contained herein or in prior press releases which are not historical fact, such as statements regarding USA Mobility's expectations for future operating and financial performance, are forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor provisions under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause USA Mobility's actual results to be materially different from the future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expectations include, but are not limited to, declining demand for paging products and services, the ability to continue to reduce operating expenses, future capital needs, competitive pricing pressures, competition from both traditional paging services and other wireless communications services, government regulation, reliance upon third-party providers for certain equipment and services, as well as other risks described from time to time in periodic reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Although USA Mobility believes the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, it can give no assurance that its expectations will be attained. USA Mobility disclaims any intent or obligation to update any forward-looking statements.
Contact: Bob Lougee (703) 721-3080
Source: USA Mobility (Includes financial tables.)
USA Mobility Reports Receipt of Nasdaq Staff Determination Letter
ALEXANDRIA, Va., April 5, 2006 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX News Network/—USA Mobility, Inc. (Nasdaq: USMO), a leading provider of wireless messaging services, today announced that it has received a notice from the Nasdaq National Market stating that Nasdaq has not received the company's 2005 Form 10-K as required by Marketplace Rule 4310(c)(14) and that the company's securities will be de-listed from The Nasdaq Stock Market at the opening of business on April 12, 2006, unless the company requests a hearing in accordance with the Marketplace Rule 4800 Series. USA Mobility intends to request a hearing before the Nasdaq listing qualifications panel with respect to this notice, which will have the effect of suspending the de-listing notice until resolution of the hearing. There can be no assurance that the panel will grant the company's request for continued listing.
The company intends to file its 2005 Form 10-K as soon as it completes its 2005 financial results, and its outside auditor, Price Waterhouse Coopers, LLP, has completed the audit of USA Mobility's 2005 financial statements. As the company has previously announced, it also is restating financial results for 2003 and 2004, and the interim periods for 2004 and 2005. Those restated results will be filed prior to filing its 2005 Form 10-K.
USA Mobility announced preliminary un-audited 2005 operating results in a news release on April 3, 2006 and held an earnings call for investors on April 4, 2006 to review those results. The news release is available on the company's website at http://www.usamobility.com, and a transcript of the earnings call will be posted on the website as soon as it is available.
About USA Mobility
USA Mobility, Inc., headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, is a leading provider of paging products and other wireless services to the business, government, healthcare and emergency response sectors. USA Mobility offers traditional one-way and advanced two-way paging via its nationwide networks covering more than 90% of the U.S. population. In addition, the company offers mobile voice and data services through Sprint Nextel and Cingular Wireless, including BlackBerry and GPS location applications. The company's product offerings include wireless connectivity systems for medical, business, government and other campus environments. USA Mobility focuses on the business-to-business marketplace and supplies mobile connectivity solutions to over two-thirds of the Fortune 1000 companies. For further information visit http://www.usamobility.com.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act: This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that involve risks and uncertainties and reflect the company's judgment as of the date of this release. These statements include those related to the company's hearing before the Nasdaq listing qualifications panel, the panel's resolution of the company's request to continue its Nasdaq listing and matters relating to the completion of the company's restatement, audit of its consolidated financial statements and the filing of its 2005 Form 10-K. Actual events or results may differ materially from the company's expectations. There can be no assurance that the panel will grant the company's request for continued listing or that the company will complete the filing of its 2005 Form 10-K within sufficient time to remain listed on Nasdaq. In addition, our financial results and stock price may suffer as a result of the de-listing notice, an unfavorable determination by the Nasdaq hearing panel, or other actions taken by governmental or other regulatory bodies in connection with this process. Additional information concerning these and other risk factors affecting the company's business can be found in the company's public periodic filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and via the company's website at http://www.usamobility.com. The company disclaims any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements beyond the date of this release.
Contact:
Bob Lougee
(703) 721-3080
Source: USA Mobility
FEATURED ADVERTISERS SUPPORTING THE NEWSLETTER |
WIRELESS REBOOTING SOLUTIONS WISP NETWORKS • DIGITAL CAMERAS & SINAGE INFORMATION KIOSKS • CO-LOCATION FACILITIES
NOW YOU CAN DO THE LEGWORK OF AN ENTIRE WORKFORCE . . . IN AN INSTANT. Put the innovative technology of Nighthawk to work for you. For more information on any of our products or services, please contact us. Nighthawk Systems, Inc. Phone: 877-764-4484 |
|
GTES has recently made the strategic decision to expanding its development activities to include wireless location technologies; a market that researchers forecast could reach $3.6 billion by 2010. In support of this new strategic direction, GTES has developed SHERLOC™ a complete one-stop wireless location service, providing the flexibility of being protocol neutral and network agnostic. Targeted at business customers who need to track their high-value shipments or better manage their service or delivery fleets, SHERLOC™ is a hosted application that combines configuration flexibility with ease of use. GTES is offering SHERLOC™ services both directly and through authorized resellers. If your company has an interest in finding out how location services can enhance your revenue stream, and has the contacts and expertise to make you successful in the location marketplace, please contact us for further information at www.sherlocgps.com and select “Reseller Opportunities,” or call us at 770-754-1666 for more information. www.gtesinc.com GTES is the only Glenayre authorized software support provider in the Paging industry. With over 200 years of combined experience in Glenayre hardware and software support, GTES offers the industry the most professional support and engineering development staff available. Continued Support Programs CALL US TODAY FOR YOUR SUPPORT NEEDS
|
Wireless Communication Solutions
|
|
|
The Paging Industry expects quality, reliable, and high performance paging products. We at Unication have listened and delivered.
About Unication Co., Ltd.
|
![]() Prism Message Gateway Systems Your Choice of Options
Popular Choice for Domestic and International
Logical Choice
Go ahead . . . be choosy . . . choose Prism Systems International
Streaming Video from the |
![]() | PUBLIC NOTICE | ||
Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 | News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 1-888-835-5322 | ||
DA 06-781 FCC’S INDEPENDENT PANEL REVIEWING THE IMPACT OF HURRICANE KATRINA ON COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS ANNOUNCES NEXT MEETING SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2006 AT FCC HEADQUARTERS Washington, D.C.: This Public Notice serves as notice that, consistent with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended, the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Independent Panel Reviewing the Impact of Hurricane Katrina on Communications Networks (“Independent Panel” or “Panel”) will hold its next meeting on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. in the Commission Meeting Room, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Room TW-C305, Washington, DC. The Panel will hear presentations from its three informal working groups (IWG-1 Infrastructure Resiliency, IWG-2 Recovery Coordination and Procedures and IWG-3 Emergency Communications) regarding their work to date. The informal working groups’ presentations will form the framework for discussion of the specific issues, findings and recommendations to be addressed in the Panel’s report to the FCC which must be submitted by June 15, 2006. The report will address the impact of Hurricane Katrina on communications infrastructure, including public safety communications, and recommendations for improving disaster preparedness, network reliability and communications among first responders. The Panel may take action on any of the issues raised during the meeting. The Panel may also hear presentations and/or demonstrations from invited representatives of government agencies and/or other entities that address emergency response and disaster preparedness issues. Members of the general public may attend the meeting. The FCC will attempt to accommodate as many people as possible. Admittance, however, will be limited to the seating availability. Real Audio access to the meeting will be available at www.fcc.gov. Open captioning will be provided for this event. Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. To request accommodations, send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY). Include a description of the accommodation you will need with as much detail as possible. Also include a way we can contact you if we need more information. Please allow at least five days advance notice; last minute requests will be accepted, but may be impossible to fill. The public may submit written comments before the meeting to: Lisa M. Fowlkes, the Commission’s Designated Federal Officer for the Independent Panel, at lisa.fowlkes@fcc.gov or by U.S. Postal Mail (Lisa M. Fowlkes, Designated Federal Officer, Hurricane Katrina Independent Panel, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Room 7-C737, Washington DC 20554). Further information regarding the Independent Panel, including publicly available documents, may be found on the Panel’s website at www.fcc.gov/eb/hkip. In addition, publicly available documents related to the Panel are available for inspection and copying at the FCC’s Public Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room CY-A257, Washington, D.C. Enforcement Bureau Contacts: Lisa M. Fowlkes, Designated Federal Officer (202) 418-7452 or Jean Ann Collins, Alternate Designated Federal Officer (202) 418-2792. News Media Contact: David Fiske (202) 418-0513. |
Source: FCC
News, opinions, opportunities, and products to help your business grow. |