From: "Christopher Effgen" <build@micronet.net>
To: <warnings@ntia.doc.gov>
Date: Fri, Jul 7, 2000 4:46 AM
Subject: Written Comment

1. Is it technologically feasible today to deliver hazard warnings: to
wireless devices, such as cell phones and pagers; over the Internet to users
who are online; to standard telephones in the form of a call warning; to
broadcast television; to satellite services; to cable television; and to
emerging and developing technologies?

The answer to all these questions is obvious: yes. However the problem in
implementing an effective system is related to the problem of the lack of
information generated for users of such a network. The use of the existing
system by local jurisdictions, by State agencies, and by Federal agencies,
other than NOAA, is virtually non existent. Calling the existing system a
Hazard Warnings network is a misnomer. If we are to call the existing
system what it does then it is only a weather warning network for all
practical purposes.

What we need to do is develop a system for the communication of the
"disaster message."

The "disaster message" is a electronic communication in which a delay brings
about or causes negative consequences.

The development of system for the facilitation of the "disaster message" is
what the commission should be involved in developing.

2. What are the tradeoffs among technology options?

If the format of the message is properly standardized, there are no
tradeoffs required. In fact the possibility exists that such a network can
be used in conjunction with the development of 5th generation technology to
provide intelligent functions.

3. What are the economic impediments, if any, to the use of any of the
technologies that might be used to disseminate hazard warnings?

The "disaster message" is the most valuable of all messages communicated by
electronic media. The impediments in developing an effective system are not
so much economic, as they are political and societal.

When we look at the economic issue, as it applies to the digital age, what
we will be established is a system that provides an information stream of
great economic value. The work of the commission will either hinder that
development or enhance it. The value of this information is such that
economic systems for the communication of the "disaster message" will
eventually be established no matter what the commission does.


4. What are the legal impediments, if any, to the use of any of the
technologies that might be used to disseminate hazard warnings?

The question here properly should be: What existing government regulations
hinder the dissemination, by electronic means, of life and safety
communication from government agencies to the people? I wish that I could
say that the problem is related to such legal issues, for then it would be a
matter of changing the law to enable the communication of the "disaster
message". What we now have is a system that virtually no other government
agencies use except NOAA.

5. What legal measures, if any, should be taken to foster the delivery of
hazard warnings?

I believe that the present problem is related to the lag that exists between
the development of the technological capacity to create and distribute
information, the reliance upon and use of existing media networks to deliver
the message, the lack of a digital standard for the communication of the
message, and the lack of a system for processing the messages that such a
system could generate. I don't know that the federal government could or
should force the State's or local jurisdictions to use the existing system
when now they do not. It perhaps should be a requirement that 911 systems
incorporate the capacity to be able to utilize the network.

6. What economic and technological policy measures, if any, should be taken
to foster the dissemination of hazard warnings?

What the commission first needs to do is to learn about the capacities that
exist, in the digital age, for the transmission and reception of the
"disaster message." These capacities go so far beyond the scope of the
commissions present approach, that the discussion of these capacities, in
the context of this request for public comment, for an upcoming public
meeting, with an existing public agenda, that there is little point at this
time and place to begin such a public discussion.

Christopher Effgen
The Disaster Center
www.disastercenter.com

The Current USA Disaster Situation Report
http://www.disastercenter.com/current.htm

Disaster Communication by way of the internet
The purpose of this list is to promote the development of the internet by
public agencies; and to discuss the development of other internet based
systems for the collection and distribution of the "disaster message."
I would like to let list members know about the:

To subcribe or unsubscribe to this list send an e-mail to:
disastercom-request@disastercenter.com
with the word
subscribe
or the word
unsubscribe
only, in the body of the message.