National Public Alerting System (NPAS)

Transcription

1 National Public Alerting System (NPAS) Status Report to the CRTC on the Participation of the Broadcast Industry January 16, 2009 REPORT CONTRIBUTORS Public Safety Canada Bell TV Canadian Association of Broadcasters Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and Radio Canada Canadian Cable Systems Alliance MTS Allstream Pelmorex Rogers Cable SaskTel Shaw Star Choice Telus Videotron

2 Table of Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF THE REPORT STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS FEDERAL, PROVINCIAL AND TERRITORIAL COLLABORATION PROJECT PHASES AND TARGET TIMELINES DEFINING NPAS ESTABLISHING A GOVERNANCE MODEL INDUSTRY STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT POLICY CONSIDERATIONS OFFICIAL LANGUAGES APPROACH PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS VERBATIM PROVISION OF BROADCAST INTRUSIVE ALERTS OPT OUT ISSUE BDU DIGITAL ONLY ISSUE NPAS AS SOURCE FOR BROADCAST INTRUSIVE AND LESSER PRIORITY ALERTS TIMING AND METHOD OF BROADCAST INTRUSIVE ALERTS ALERT FORMAT COST TO DISTRIBUTORS (BROADCASTERS/BDUS) LEGAL LIABILITY CROSS JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES NPAS OVERVIEW MODEL AND COMPONENTS KEY REQUIREMENTS STANDARDS STANDARD MESSAGE FORMAT: COMMON ALERTING PROTOCOL (CAP) UNITED STATES AND THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) INTEROPERABILITY AND INTERCONNECTIVITY TO EXISTING AND FUTURE SYSTEMS NPAS INTERFACE WITH ALERT DISTRIBUTORS THE BDU TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP VIEW OF THE NPAS PROCESS MODEL BDU TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP PAPER ALERT DELIVERY DELIVERY OF ALERT OF THE PUBLIC BY BDUS (THE BDU VIEW) Distribution of Alert Messages over Existing Communication Media Common Presentation of Alerts Customer Experience Language Estimated Time to Deliver Alerts to the Public DELIVERY OF ALERTS TO THE PUBLIC OVER RADIO AND TELEVISION (THE CAB VIEW) CONCLUSION THE VALUE ADDED OF NATIONAL PUBLIC ALERTING SYSTEM MODEL BENEFITS OF THE NPAS APPROACH Page i

3 APPENDIX A LIST OF INDUSTRY STATUS REPORTS...30 APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF LOI RESPONSES...31 APPENDIX C COMMON ALERTING PROTOCOL STANDARDS...32 APPENDIX D CAP CANADIAN PROFILE / NPAS LAYER...35 APPENDIX E CAB POSITION PAPER...37 APPENDIX F BDU PROPOSED INTERFACE...38 APPENDIX G BDU PROPOSED PRESENTATION...39 APPENDIX H FEDERAL AND INDUSTRY PARTICIPANTS Page ii

4 Glossary of Terms The following is a list of terms used within this Report: Alert: A warning message creating a state of awareness for the public, informing them of an imminent or unfolding danger to life. Alert Phrase: Phrase to be provided to the public, made up of a string of key elements from the CAP XML data set, including the event name, Originator name, affected geographical area, and instruction to the public. Alert Presentation: The method by which an alert is presented to recipients by the Distributors. Authorized Alert: Any alert which has been cleared by the Dispatch Centre as originating from an authorized Originator that is within their jurisdiction and mandate. Broadcasting Distribution Undertakings (BDU): Organizations such as cable companies or direct-tohome satellite service providers that receive and retransmit broadcasting programs. Business Requirements: Described features or capabilities of proposed systems, outlined in business terms of what must be delivered or accomplished to provide value. Common Alerting Protocol (CAP): An XML-based data format for exchanging public warning and emergency information between alerting technologies. CAP allows a warning message to be consistently disseminated simultaneously over many warning systems to many applications. CAP increases warning effectiveness and simplifies the task of activating a warning for responsible officials. Distributor: An entity that provides alert phrases to the public through its radio, television, Internet, wireless or other systems. Emergency Management: The prevention and mitigation of, preparedness for, response to and recovery from emergencies (source: Emergency Management Act, 2007). Functional Requirement: Requirements describing what the system should be able to do and the functions it should perform. Requirements are sometimes referred to as capabilities. Intrusive Alert: A high priority alert which, by definition, must be relayed to the public immediately. Originator: A government authorized entity that creates CAP XML data sets using NPAS Page i

5 1 Executive Summary The following are the key points regarding the National Public Alerting System (NPAS): Direction from Federal, Provincial and Territorial ministers responsible for emergency management: On January 9, 2008, Federal, Provincial and Territorial ministers responsible for emergency management agreed to instruct their officials to continue to work with the broadcasting industry to establish a Canadian public alerting system, to be operational in Public Safety Canada has jurisdiction and has assumed the lead role. The Department of Public Safety, in conformity with legislative authorities in the Emergency Management Act, has assumed the federal lead to develop an all-hazards NPAS. Broadcasting Distribution Undertakings (BDUs) and Broadcasters support the creation of a voluntary alerting system under the guidance of government partners. The broadcasting industry agrees that this is the best way to establish a reliable and effective NPAS. BDUs and Broadcasters are actively working towards developing a national alerting system which will be implemented in They have been responsive to requests by PS for their involvement; met project timelines; contributed to the development of policy; conducted research with vendors; performed internal tests within their own facilities and have taken steps to acquire the required infrastructure to receive and transmit emergency alerts messages. NPAS is on target for completion in PS has made NPAS a priority and in partnership with FPT partners is nearing completion of the NPAS planning and definition phase. Through a procurement strategy managed by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), the system development phase is expected to start in 2009 and the NPAS implementation phase, including system roll-out and outreach, is expected to take place in fall Change in direction could result in losing the existing momentum towards meeting the goal of a national alerting system for Canadians. The imposition of an additional and possibly separate CRTC directed solution could result in delays for public alerting in Canada by diverting the focus of broadcasters/distributors. In addition it could create a duplication of efforts as many of the current issues being addressed by NPAS would also have to be addressed by any alternative approach. Lastly, it is questionable that an alternative solution with the proposed capability of NPAS could be rolled out earlier than the 2010 NPAS target date Page 1

6 2 Introduction Public Safety (PS), under the legislative authority in the Emergency Management Act, has taken the federal lead to develop an all-hazards National Public Alerting System (NPAS). The goal of NPAS is to enable authorized Federal, Provincial and Territorial officials to rapidly warn the public in a systematic, consistent and timely fashion of imminent or unfolding dangers to life (e.g. tornadoes, floods or hazardous chemical spills). PS, in partnership with the provinces and territories, is developing NPAS to fill the public alerting gap in Canada. On February 28, 2007, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) set out its approach to the establishment of emergency alert services in Canada. The CRTC decision 1 urged broadcasters, cable and satellite direct-to-home providers to carry alert messages voluntarily. At the January 9, 2008 meeting of FPT ministers responsible for emergency management, ministers expressed support for the timely creation of a national public alerting system and noted it must function in all provinces and territories. Ministers agreed to instruct their officials to continue to work with the broadcasting industry to establish a Canadian public alerting system, to be operational in At the June 26, 2008 meeting of FPT deputy ministers responsible for emergency management, deputy ministers directed that a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a technical solution for NPAS be issued once the business requirements were in place. NPAS alerts will identify the authorized government agencies issuing alerts; the imminent danger; and the communities and areas affected. These alerts may also include recommended protective actions that should be taken as well as where to obtain additional information. The system would work on a 24/7 basis and use a multimedia approach to maximize the reach of alerts including AM/FM radio broadcasting; over-the-air cable and direct-to-home (DTH) satellite television; and eventually to other media (e.g. the Internet). The NPAS initiative supports the CRTC s vision by providing Canadian industry with a sole source of authoritative and authenticated alerts which the industry can then distribute to Canadians on a voluntary basis. 1 Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC Emergency Alert Services Page 2

7 3 Purpose of the Report The purpose of this report is to highlight the progress made by Senior Officials Responsible for Emergency Management (SOREM) and industry stakeholder groups towards the establishment of NPAS. The development of the National Public Alerting System is a multi-stakeholder process involving the federal government, provinces / territories, and the broadcasting and telecommunications industries. NPAS requires the collaboration, cooperation and participation of the Broadcaster Distribution Undertakings (BDUs) and Broadcasters. The following diagram depicts the respective areas of government and industry involvement.! The Government portion (in yellow) is a FPT shared project to be funded through cost-sharing agreements. The Government's role is to originate, authenticate and forward alert messages to Industry.! The Industry role (in green), following the previously described CRTC approach, is to voluntarily receive and transmit alerts to the Public. FPT and Industry Participation The FPT group includes all provinces and territories within Canada. If the provinces and territories so choose, they can also authorize municipalities within their jurisdiction to act as alert originators. The Industry Distributors include two main groups: BDUs and broadcasters. BDUs include cable television, satellite to home and others such as IP-based television services delivered by telecommunication companies (Telco TV). Broadcasters include over-the-air radio and television, speciality services and their industry association - the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB). Several industry partners have provided individual progress reports which have been attached to this report (see Appendix A List of Industry Status Reports) Page 3

8 4 Stakeholder Engagement and Collaborative Efforts 4.1 Federal, Provincial and Territorial Collaboration Following the last meeting of ministers responsible for emergency management in January 2008, representatives of the Provincial and Territorial emergency management organizations have been working together with federal government departments (Public Safety Canada, Environment Canada, Industry Canada, Natural Resources Canada and Canadian Heritage) and the CRTC to support the planning of the NPAS project. The representatives of the provinces and territories view a nationally coordinated and standardized system as enhancing and complementing their own public alerting systems. Overall, they are satisfied with the level of cooperation of BDUs and broadcasters. The NPAS project is being delivered over three phases: Phase 1 Planning and Definition; Phase 2 Development; and Phase 3 Implementation. FPT partners are nearing completion of the planning and definition phase. Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) is presently developing a proposed procurement strategy for a technical solution for NPAS. After the tender bids for a proposed technical solution have been received, FPT partners will be invited to provide representatives to join the technical evaluation team to review the submitted bids. Once a vendor has been selected and the contract signed, the system development phase will commence in 2009 and is expected to be completed in summer FPT partners will also be invited to participate in the user acceptance testing and training development phases to ensure that the solution will address the needs of the emergency management community of users. The implementation phase, which includes a full system roll-out and public outreach communications, is currently scheduled for the fall of In addition to contributing to the NPAS initiative, the Province of Alberta is in the process of replacing the provincially based Emergency Public Warning System (EPWS). While Alberta is in the preliminary stages of defining the requirements for the replacement system, the province intends to follow the same international and Canadian alert messaging standards used by NPAS, which will ensure system compatibility. 4.2 Project Phases and Target Timelines Project Phases Target Timelines Planning and Definition 2008 Development 2009 to Summer 2010 Implementation Summer and Fall Page 4

9 4.3 Defining NPAS In April 2008, PS issued a Letter of Interest (LOI) to solicit comments from industry on a draft Statement of Work for the development or licensing of a public alerting solution for NPAS. The provinces and territories participated in the consultation process through which their input on system requirements and potential solution capabilities was obtained. In addition, PS has been engaging a number of federal departments/agencies on the policy, technical and communications dimensions of the project. As the system development phase is expected to commence in 2009, PS will be intensifying its strategic engagement activities with other departments/agencies to ensure consistency with originators mandated business practices, systems and trends within the federal and provincial community. Based on the LOI process outcomes (see Appendix B Summary of LOI Responses), the expertise provided by other federal departments, and ongoing input from the provinces and territories, PS successfully delivered core project building-blocks, namely a Project Charter and a Concept of Operations:! The Project Charter provides a comprehensive overview of the NPAS project, allowing partners and stakeholders to develop a common understanding of key project management considerations (e.g. objectives, scope, deliverables, stages, organization, risks, and resources requirements, etc.).! The Concept of Operations articulates the alert management process and business process models. It forms the basis for the acquisition of a technical solution through a procurement process expected to be conducted in In late fall 2008 these two project building-blocks were endorsed by the FPT Senior Officials Responsible for Emergency Management (SOREM), which reports to the FPT Ministers Responsible for Emergency Management. PS is currently working with Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) to develop an approach to the technical solution that meets FPT public alerting needs. As confirmed during the LOI process, the industry already possesses capabilities to deliver such a solution. PS will lead the procurement strategy in 2009, as directed by the ministers responsible for emergency management in January Establishing a Governance Model As the NPAS is a multi-stakeholder initiative of national scope, a governance model was developed. The governance model includes a FPT Steering Committee responsible for providing ongoing oversight to the system and ensuring that policy/operational issues are addressed promptly. PS is representing the interests of its federal partners (Environment Canada, Industry Canada, Natural Resources Canada and Canadian Heritage) on the Steering Committee whereas the provinces and territories are expected to represent the interests of municipalities within their respective jurisdictions. The core responsibilities of the Steering Committee, which is co-chaired by PS and provincial/territorial members on a rotational basis, include: Page 5

10 ! Establishing strategic direction for NPAS, including ongoing development and operations;! Providing an ongoing link for input and updates to FPT fora; and! Overseeing certain business and financial requirements. Given the importance of ensuring strategic linkages between decision makers and key stakeholders and partners, the governance model also includes a NPAS Advisory Committee. It will be established in 2009 to provide advice and expertise to the NPAS Steering Committee on an ongoing basis. Membership will include representatives of the broadcasting sector, emergency management organizations, and other stakeholders, as required. PS is committed to providing secretariat support to the Steering Committee and other working committees created under the governance model. 4.5 Industry Stakeholder Engagement In 2007, PS carried out a stakeholder engagement strategy and consulted with broadcasters, cable companies and satellite-to-home companies individually. These companies not only expressed a willingness to participate in the project but also provided information on their reach to the public (coverage) and discussed how they would be able to target timely alerts to the population in affected communities. PS holds regular meetings to update the industry and government stakeholder groups on NPAS activities. PS established and co-chairs active working groups with stakeholder participation and holds joint meetings across stakeholder groups to discuss common issues as needed. The following technical working groups have been established:! BDU Technical Working Group (NPAS BDU TWG), has the mandate to provide technical requirements, advice and potential solutions for effective interface between the NPAS Dispatch Centre and BDUs. This group meets every two weeks and its members have developed a number of papers to identify and resolve technical and policy issues including alert presentation, BDU interface requirements and BDU positions on policy issues such as the broadcasters opt-out. Membership includes all major BDUs, including Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) providers, the Canadian Cable System Alliance (CCSA) and key federal departments such as the CRTC, Environment Canada, Industry Canada, Natural Resources Canada and PS.! Broadcasters Technical Working Group (NPAS Broadcasters TWG), has the mandate to provide requirements and potential solutions for effective technical and operational interfaces between the NPAS Dispatch Centre and over-the-air radio and television broadcasters. Its membership consists of representatives from public and private broadcasting entities, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters and key federal government departments (Environment Canada, Industry Canada, Natural Resources Canada, and PS) and the CRTC Page 6

11 5 Policy Considerations Recognising and resolving policy considerations in the planning phase supports the costeffective development and successful implementation of NPAS. The timely resolution of policy issues has been instrumental in moving forward the development of technical solutions. Key policy considerations are described below. 5.1 Official Languages Approach Alerting in both official languages is a key guiding principle of the proposed NPAS system. The requirement for bilingual messages is reflected in the NPAS technical requirements, which specify that alert messaging will be in French and English. NPAS will provide two versions of all audio messages: one incorporating English first, followed by French, with the other in French followed by English. PS identified this requirement to BDUs and broadcasters who have agreed to use bilingual messages. 5.2 Persons with Special Needs By providing both text and audio messages to service providers, the needs of persons with disabilities will be adressed. While radio broadcasters are limited to audio messages, BDUs and television broadcasters will be providing both audio and text. In addition, NPAS will provide alert messages though Really Simple Syndication (RSS) feeds making it easier for persons with disabilities to gain access to alert messages. This format makes it easy to forward alerts by text messaging, which is commonly used by Canadians who have hearing impairments. 5.3 Verbatim Provision of Broadcast Intrusive Alerts The FPT Emergency Management (EM) community requires that the alert message be carried verbatim and recommends that the audio and text provided by NPAS be automatically inserted into the broadcast. This approach was to ensure that the public can easily recognize the alert as it has been issued by a government agency and that the public in an affected area will be in a position to take appropriate action to stay out of harm s way. This is also important for ensuring consistency of alert messages across different media. The broadcasters initial position was that they wished to edit such messages and/or provide these alerts through on-site reporting as news items. However, after consultation and discussion, the broadcasters agreed with BDUs to provide unaltered alerts in a timely manner. Radio and TV broadcasters presently recommend that they should be permitted to insert NPAS verbatim alerting messages either automatically or manually, so long as airing occurs within a pre-defined latency period following receipt. PS has noted the concern raised by the broadcasters that audio alert message must be provided in broadcast quality. The NPAS technical design will ensure that the audio messages are of acceptable quality Page 7

12 5.4 Opt out Issue In 2008, the broadcasters identified their intention to negotiate protocols with BDUs to ensure that alerting messages inserted by local broadcasters were not removed or masked. PS maintained the position that given the CRTC s amendment of section 7 of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations on July 17, , BDUs have the authority to alter broadcasters signals for the purposes of providing an emergency alert message. PS also noted that while such a situation could present duplicate messaging, over-alerting was preferable to no alerting. PS recommended that the BDUs and the broadcasters discuss and resolve the optout issue. The BDUs developed a discussion paper outlining the costs and complexity of providing local conventional TV broadcasters with the ability to opt-out of a BDU alerting solution. This paper was shared with the broadcasters and following broadcaster-bdu discussions in fall 2008, the broadcasters agreed that having the ability to opt out is no longer required and that serving the needs of the public is of greater importance. However, both TV broadcasters and BDUs recognize the need for the development of protocols with respect to message placement and time synchronization in order to eliminate message masking problems on viewers receivers. PS is presently holding joint BDU/Broadcaster technical working group discussions to facilitate the resolution of the remaining or other emerging technical issues. 5.5 BDU digital only Issue At the onset of the project, cable BDUs proposed a digital only solution on the basis that they are presently de-commissioning their analog services. In their view, to provide both digital and analog alerting solutions would add unnecessary complexity and require a significant investment in legacy systems. At the December 3, 2008 meeting of broadcasters, BDUs and federal government officials, CRTC officials expressed the view that it was acceptable for the cable BDUs to provide an alerting solution to digital-only customers. The CRTC representatives agreed with the BDU cable industry that since the analog broadcasting system service is rapidly transitioning to digital, it would be wiser to invest in providing alerting services on a digital basis service. In addition, it was recognized that Canadians receiving television signals in an analog format or over-the-air would receive emergency alerts from local conventional television stations. 5.6 NPAS as Source for Broadcast Intrusive and Lesser Priority Alerts The FPT community has a requirement to send out broadcast intrusive alerts that are of the highest level of urgency and severity and must therefore be immediately broadcast to the public. In addition, the FPT community has the requirement to issue less urgent alerts that are non-broadcast intrusive alerts. These would include events that may be forecast days in advance and may be carried through regular news broadcasts. It is not the intention of FPT partners to invest in either multiple or complex systems. Therefore the NPAS solution is being created to manage both intrusive and non intrusive 2 Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC Amendments to the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations Emergency Alert Messages Page 8

13 alerts. This approach has the added advantage of ensuring that the system will be used on a routine basis and non-intrusive alerts will be available as an information source for the use of the news media and other interested parties. Broadcasters also expressed concerns with respect to the potential number and type of intrusive alerts. They wanted to judge which alerts should interrupt their regular programming for distribution to the public. Public notification of threatening situations is the mandated responsibility of Federal, Provincial and Territorial authorities. As is the case today, the generation of intrusive alerts will follow the clearly defined protocol of the authorities responsible for originating alerts. The FPT emergency management community will routinely review what situations constitute an intrusive alert in order to minimize the unnecessary disruption of the Canadian public and routine programming of the alert distributors. To address concerns expressed by the broadcasters and BDUs, NPAS will be a dedicated system that will clearly identify and push intrusive alerts to them on a priority basis. 5.7 Timing and Method of Broadcast Intrusive Alerts Under the NPAS concept, the broadcasters and BDUs are to identify and acquire their necessary equipment and infrastructure needs in order to receive and distribute timely intrusive alerts to the public. This includes making the appropriate adjustments to their systems with the goal of being able to automatically insert the text and audio of the alerts over television and radio channels. These areas are currently being explored by the technical working groups through testing and consultation with their vendors. However, certain broadcasters have indicated that at present there is no commercially available CAP compatible equipment and they have yet to receive pre-production units that can be tested. As a result, their ability to design, test and cost is constrained. Unless vendor timelines coincide with the targeted NPAS 2010 implementation date, industry implementation of NPAS may be staggered by necessity. Broadcasters have stated that an automatic interrupt is not always desirable and may not always result in the fastest way to air alerts because of situations such as loop delays during phone-in programs. As a result, they have requested that a latency standard be established. PS has asked broadcasters to provide further information regarding latency issues and is facilitating technical working group meetings to address this issue. PS is also chairing joint Broadcaster and BDU technical working group meetings to discuss protocols with respect to message repetition, all clear messages and satellite uplink requirements. 5.8 Alert Format NPAS will provide structured audio and text alert phrases in both French and English. NPAS is adopting the international standard for alert messaging the Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) and will be implementing the CAP Canadian Profile (CAP-CP) in order to adapt the international CAP standards to meet the geo-political and language needs of Canada. These alerts will be provided in Extensible Mark-up Language (XML) format which is technology and vendor independent Page 9

14 Environment Canada, in collaboration with PS, had developed and is presently hosting a website that provides sample alerts in CAP / CAP-CP compliant XML Really Simple Syndication (RSS) feeds for industry testing purposes. These RSS feeds include sample alerts phrases in text format. 5.9 Cost to Distributors (Broadcasters/BDUs) It is the position of PS that as the result of the CRTC Decision with respect to public alerting, distributors are to provide public alerts on a voluntary basis. This is interpreted by PS to mean that any distributor expenses associated with receiving, processing and distributing public alerts are the responsibility of distributors. The Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) document dated December 10, 2008 (see Appendix E CAB Position Paper) indicates that broadcasters will undertake to absorb costs for studio equipment and software modifications, as well as related operating and maintenance expenses. However CAB is requesting that the cost of any required receiving equipment at broadcast insertion points be paid for through public funds, similar in the manner which the Province of Alberta operates its Emergency Public Warning System (EPWS). The CAB document highlights the following possible outcomes of an absence of public subsidies:! Smaller broadcasters may be reluctant to participate in a voluntary NPAS, delaying a universal roll-out; and! Broadcasters with many re-broadcasting sites may be obliged to distribute alerting messages via all the transmitters in their delivery chain at the same time in order to limit costs to manageable levels. Presently, the FPT NPAS initiative is not considering paying for the costs that may be incurred by the distributors to develop, test or operate their systems to receive, process and distribute public alerts. In addition, PS will not be seeking public funds for such a purpose Legal Liability The general position of the broadcasters and the BDUs is that NPAS should provide the participating distributors with assurances that, as long as they carry out their commitment for the timely delivery of authorized emergency alerting messages, they will be saved harmless from civil actions, regulatory consequences or criminal prosecution. As the department responsible for administering the Broadcasting Act, Canadian Heritage agreed that the legal liability issue needs to be addressed and suggested the following steps be taken: 1) risk assessments from each party, 2) a policy decision, and 3) implementation. Risk assessments will require input from industry and discussions to occur in parallel with the evolution of the NPAS model. PS has initiated this review by requesting that the industry provide their legal liability risk assessments Page 10

15 5.11 Cross Jurisdictional Issues The NPAS dispatch centre will manage the generation of public alerts across Federal, Provincial and Territorial government jurisdictions and will incorporate safeguards to prevent different organizations from issuing simultaneous alerts for the same event. The NPAS business requirements specify that alert message originators may only issue alerts for the geopolitical jurisdictions for which they have been authorized to do so. NPAS is designed so that all authorized alert message issuers are aware of alerts that have been issued for their location. This will ensure that different government levels or jurisdictions do not deliver the same alert to broadcasters through NPAS Page 11

16 6 NPAS Overview 6.1 Model and Components The FPT partners agree on the NPAS model and its main components:! Originators: FPT authorized alert Originators make a decision to issue the alert and are responsible for the content of alert messages.! NPAS Technical Solution: Will deliver a standard functionality across Canada to be used by authorised alert Originators to create and package alerts and allow these alerts to be subsequently authenticated and disseminated up to and including the point where messages are provided to the Distributors (i.e. broadcasters and BDUs).! Distributors: Distributors receive and acknowledge validated alert messages and then present the alerts to the public in the affected areas using the Distributors existing communications media channels. Distributors voluntarily provide this receipt, acknowledgement and distribution service, providing the technology and/or modify their own systems at their own cost.! Public: Receives consistent alert messaging over various media channels Page 12

17 6.2 Key Requirements NPAS Status Report to the CRTC The NPAS key requirements were identified in consultation with FPT partners and are consistent with the jurisdictional responsibilities of federal agencies and provinces/territories in the areas of emergency management. Key requirements are to:! Have appropriate public response to alerts! Have alerts transmitted without alteration! Provide consistent messaging to the public across all participating distributors! Make alerts available in both official languages! Make alerts available in audio and text accessible to people with disabilities! Take an all hazards approach (system can be used for any type of emergency event) and ensure that the system may be used for the most urgent alerts (broadcast intrusive) as well as less urgent alerts (non-broadcast intrusive)! Have optimal public accessibility through the use of radio and television channels and flexibility to expand to other media! Operate 24/7 with technical support in the event of an Internet or power outage! Have a secure system end-to-end! Provide a single, authoritative, central and automated solution/dispatch centre! Clear process to BDUs on distribution of the alert! Feedback loop to dispatch centre to ensure message was received and distributed Page 13

18 7 Standards All NPAS stakeholder groups agree to use the Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) as the standard message format for NPAS. CAP is an open standard developed specifically for alerting and warning systems. In adopting CAP NPAS is joining a community of international CAP users. This strategy allows for the distribution of alerts to the public using a variety of communication channels and also allows for exchange alerts between Canada, the United States and other countries using internal government systems. Further details on CAP and its benefits are outlined in Appendix C CAP Standards. 7.1 Standard Message Format: Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) Significant effort has gone into developing CAP expertise in Canada. In particular, along with a community of alerting practitioners, PS has been working with Industry Canada, Environment Canada and Natural Resources Canada to develop a CAP Canadian Profile (CAP-CP) to implement public alerting in a Canadian context. The Canadian context deals specifically with official languages, managed lists of Canadian events and location codes. Further details on CAP-CP are outlined in Appendix D CAP Canadian Profile / NPAS Layer Developing a CAP-CP standard involves identifying technical specifications for each data element so that it complies with the international CAP structure and policy on usage. By NPAS adopting the open CAP and CAP-CP standards, distributors and vendors will be able to develop and implement their own software and hardware solutions as a community of users or individually depending on their needs and resources. The end result will be the implementation of an alert messaging protocol that will permit distributors and the public to easily process and filter alert information. 7.2 United States and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) In the U.S., FEMA is adopting CAP. As a result the U.S. legacy Emergency Alert System (EAS) is undergoing changes to become CAP compatible. Presently, the EAS profile of CAP is being reviewed by the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS, the international governing body of the CAP standard). Canada s profile will similarly be reviewed. The Canadian broadcasting industry is interested in the EAS equipment and through its vendors has made Canadian requirements known. Their direct participation in any relevant standards group would be beneficial in order to ensure that Canadian requirements are included and that their involvement may result in economies of scale Page 14

19 8 Interoperability and Interconnectivity to Existing and Future Systems The NPAS approach is to maximize interoperability and interconnectivity with other systems not only in terms of technology but also in terms of how NPAS fits into emergency management programs. PS has worked closely with both the FPT message Originators and Distributors to develop NPAS Interface Requirements to ensure that an alert can make its way in an automated fashion from the Originators to the Distributors. As the NPAS project matures, other Originators and/or Distributors who choose to participate in the generation and distribution of alerts may be identified. The scalable nature of the design and architecture of NPAS will make it possible for them to do so. The NPAS interface with alert Originators provides a web-portal with drop down menus to create alert messages. In addition, NPAS allows Originators to use their own systems to create alerts and transmit them through NPAS in compliance with NPAS specifications. 8.1 NPAS Interface with Alert Distributors By using recognized standards (i.e. CAP and CAP-CP) the complexity associated with interoperability between different systems that comply with the standards, is reduced. In consultation with the BDUs and Broadcasters, PS has agreed to provide, along with CAP XML, a NPAS layer which includes: the broadcast intrusive flag ; alert phrases in both French and English in text and audio along with the full CAP XML alert message and; separate feeds for only the broadcast intrusive alerts to the BDUs and broadcasters. These broadcast intrusive feeds will be distributed through two redundant streams to Distributors (i.e. via Internet and satellite). Through an agreement with PS, Environment Canada has developed and operates a web site to provide sample alert through RSS feeds, scenario notes, and implementation reference material (see The BDU Technical Working Group View of the NPAS Process Model The following has been provided by the BDU technical working group. Once the PS Request for Proposal (RFP) for a vendor solution has been issued and the selection process has been completed, BDUs will be able to more accurately define the internal message process. Given current known requirements and some of the requested changes, the process model below provides a good overview of the process flow for alert messages received by BDUs from NPAS. Once a candidate has been chosen and working sessions begin, it is anticipated that the process model will require some changes and optional flows. Each BDU has a different operating reality. In addition, distribution network architectures differ. As a result, a single process flow will not adequately meet the needs of all BDUs. Below is one possible solution: Page 15

20 Page 16

21 8.3 BDU Technical Working Group Paper NPAS Status Report to the CRTC The BDUs Technical Working Group (TWG) prepared a paper outlining its proposed NPAS interface solution, with supporting information (see Appendix F BDU Proposed Interface). The TWG recognised that it cannot specify some aspects of the final NPAS solution since they will be decided by the NPAS candidate selected by PS through its RFP process. That said, the TWG made recommendations based on common industry practices and experiences. Modifications to the proposed solutions are anticipated, once the NPAS system has been fully defined and the impacts of each proposal can be assessed against the varying needs of NPAS users. Though the solutions proposed are based on the BDUs requirements, consideration was also given to the needs of broadcasters and the issues they might face. While no Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) members were involved in the preparation of the paper, it was always the intent of the BDU TWG to provide this document to the CAB for feedback. This was done on November 19, 2008 For the purpose of relevancy and accuracy, the first priority was to establish the scope of the NPAS-BDU relationship. Assumptions were made based on what is known, what is required and the expectations of both the CRTC and PS. The group used the following initial assumptions to guide its efforts. 1) Distribution system availability must meet a minimum of 99.99%. 2) Solution is for digital-only broadcasting distribution systems. 3) Communications of the alert message must be secure and maintain message integrity. 4) Distribution systems must be redundant. 5) NPAS system will be fully redundant. 6) NPAS will be deployed over geographically diverse sites. 7) Interfacing must use industry standard protocols and equipment. 8) Message size will not exceed 1MB. a) Text size (XML) will not exceed 200k and will contain both languages in a single file. b) Audio file sizes will not exceed 800k (or two minutes) and will contain both languages in a single file. 9) Architecture must meet, or exceed, BDUs standard IT practices for external communication. 10) NPAS web servers will be dedicated for BDUs. 11) NPAS web servers for BDUs will be filtered to contain only intrusive messages (i.e. of imminent or unfolding danger to life). 12) CAB members who have transmitter sites without Internet connectivity, have either a satellite or radio capability. 13) The distribution system will be secure by employing: access authentication; message authentication and security to prevent hacking. 14) Messages will be assigned priority/urgency before sent to BDUs. 15) Messages will be distributed by BDUs unaltered Page 17

22 16) All messages received will be logged and archived for 4 years. Logs will be provided regularly to PSC. 17) All data stored on the Distributors local system will be secured and accessible to authorized users only. 18) The distribution system will be regularly maintained to ensure ongoing security and stability. 19) Message volume will not exceed 50 per year (intrusive alerts only) per province. 20) Distributors must acknowledge receipt of alerts messages; if the return path is unavailable, the acknowledgement must be sent later. Given the above assumptions, PS Letter of Interest and the BDU industry s best practices, the TWG identified three possible solutions. The first proposed solution (preferred by BDUs) is to rely on push-based IP messaging over the Internet using industry standard interfacing techniques. The use of the Internet was widely regarded as the fastest, the most reliable and easiest to manage. While this departs from the US-based EAS practice of using a radio service, it overcomes the main shortcoming of EAS: limits on message size and density of the information being transmitted. Coupled with hardware and geographical redundancy, IP messaging is a very reliable primary solution for BDUs. The second solution proposed (as a backup for BDUs in the event of failure of the primary interface), would be the use of one-way satellite transmission. This solution would also be based on IP messaging, formatted for transport over an available Canadian satellite (the footprint of which would need to be national). This solution is similar to the primary interface proposal. However, the main shortcoming is that the communication path is only one way. This, therefore, requires that the audio file be pushed rather than retrieved. Message receipt acknowledgements must be stored and then forwarded when the primary interface method is once again available. Although this reduces functionality, it was agreed that the loss of the primary interface would only be due to a significant event. This event would be so significant that the Internet would be inundated with requests (or unavailable due to major issues), making it relatively unusable. However, under such a scenario, it is believed that if alert messages from the originator are sent quickly enough, BDUs and CAB members would have sufficient time to broadcast the first message advising the public of what to do. The major factors contributing to the proposal of a one-way, as opposed to two-way, system was on the cost of deployment and cost of ownership. A third proposed solution addresses the difficulties faced by some CAB members who might not have Internet access at select transmitter sites. In this situation, digital radio services (not to be confused with digital satellite radio) could be used in a manner similar to how EAS messages are currently sent to broadcasters and BDUs in the U.S. The BDU TWG considered this to be an excellent alternative for CAB members as a backup alternative to a primary satellite interface solution. Using the BDU TWG s proposed interface, a sample architecture for the NPAS-BDU interface was drafted (see Appendix F BDU Proposed Interface). The TWG document was distributed by PS to the CAB TWG for comment. Once feedback has been received from the CAB, the paper may be revised to address any additional items or inaccuracies Page 18

23 9 Alert Delivery To maximize the reach to the public, the NPAS model is to distribute the same alert message over a combination of media. Currently PS is working with following industries: AM and FM radio, television and cable television, satellite-to-home and IPTV. Through the collaboration of these media, the alerts will be pushed to the public. Each media has advantages: for example, radio may be a very effective way to reach the public during the morning and evening commute to work, and television may be very effective during its peak evening hours. In addition, NPAS will provide alert messages through RSS feeds so they may be carried by other Distributors on a voluntary basis. The public may also pull alerts directly from the NPAS website using an Internet browser. In addition the alerts will be published on a website. It is important that the alerts grab the public s attention and stimulate the appropriate response from the public. PS is coordinating a common presentation of alerts across BDUs, broadcasters and FPT partners. This includes both technical and policy decisions on: bilingual alerts, alerts in both the audio and text (except radio), attention signal (3 second tone preceding the alert), number of repeats per hour and common look and feel (i.e., colour and font used). 9.1 Delivery of Alert of the Public by BDUs (The BDU View) Distribution of Alert Messages over Existing Communication Media The CRTC s objective in the provision of alerts to the public through BDUs and broadcasters is to reach as many Canadians as possible (this may later be expanded to include other communications media, such as the Internet and wireless services). In developing its interface proposals, the BDU TWG also kept in mind the possible interface requirements of other types of media. As noted in section NPAS Interface with Alert Distributors, the TWG concluded that the Internet should be the primary mode of interface between NPAS and BDUs. The TWG recognizes that the Internet may not be available to all alert message distributors. To address any geographical shortcomings, the TWG considered one-way satellite transmission was a logical primary interface method for those with no Internet connectivity, and as a secondary interface method for those with access to the Internet. The following issues should be read, and understood, in the following context. Many of the BDUs do not have the ability to target customers to the level of granularity defined with the geo-codes used in alerting. Therefore messages may be sent to an area larger than those defined within the geo-codes in the CAP message. All Canadians in the affected area will receive the notification as well as some in an adjacent area may as well. This should be kept in mind when building alert text that the message is clear as to where the danger truly exists. A concern was raised by the TWG regarding the potential for geo-codes to change in the future (change due to political boundary changes through re-distribution). The TWG put forward the proposal for NPAS to be designed in such a way so as to adopt these changes in a dynamic manner, which can flow through to BDUs. The BDU TWG does not however agree that message targeting should follow these political boundaries. Doing so adds a layer of Page 19

24 operational complexity for BDUs (and broadcasters) without any gain in operational efficiency. It also increases the risk of error in the targeting and delivery of messages to geographical areas impacted. While the project is aiming at adopting the Statistics Canada Standard Geographic Code (SGC geo-code) as specified in Common Alerting Protocol Canadian Profile (CAP-CP), the examples of alerts sent by Public Safety Canada were specifying 2 types of geo-codes (SGC geo-code and Canadian Location Code (CLC) geo-code which mimics the codes used in the U.S. specific to hardware built in the U.S.) plus the polygon identified by the coordinates (latitude and longitude) which limit the area. The TWG proposes to initially adopt the StatsCan geo-code and manage it thereafter for its own interests and ongoing emergency alerting development. At a recent BDU TWG meeting, a proposal was put forward for the use of a two-way satellite interface but the TWG felt that it would be cost prohibitive for smaller and/or more geographically dispersed BDUs. A separate TWG is currently in the process of being put together to study this possibility and to give broadcasters and BDUs the opportunity to provide technical input. In summary, the methods proposed above permit alert messages to be received by every broadcaster and BDU (at their receiver/transmitter sites), anywhere in Canada. The message can then be relayed, internally, by the broadcasters and BDUs to their viewers and digital customers, respectively Common Presentation of Alerts The BDU TWG has concluded that it is important to provide the Canadian public with alert messages that have a common look and feel. However, after conducting a detailed analysis, it was determined that an identical alert presentation across all BDUs would not be possible. While there are obvious differences between satellite and cable technologies and architectures, differences in alert message presentation actually originate from the U.S. EAS system. Equipment manufacturers in the US have been designing and manufacturing equipment for the U.S. market for many years. Canadian BDUs generally deploy this equipment with their distribution networks. The U.S. never defined a standard for alert message presentation. As a result, each manufacturer developed a different solution and a variety of presentation formats now exist. For many technical reasons, this cannot be changed. This will be the basis upon which Canadian BDUs must support the delivery of alerts from NPAS to their customers. The BDU TWG s objective was to develop a consistent approach to the presentation of alert messages, recognizing the different types of equipment (and display capabilities) deployed by each provider. BDUs have agreed to adopt this interim proposal and try to follow it as close as they technically can. It is hoped that a formal Canadian standard can be developed, from which BDUs can work closely with vendors to support a common experience. The final TWG proposal (see Appendix G BDU Proposed Presentation) outlines the preferred message display format, the timing and the limitations that BDUs currently face. It also details the two currently available methods of display: a text crawl and a force tune (both carrying the required audio). Neither mode was given any preference; it is up to each BDU to decide how best to use their equipment/network to most effectively alert their customers Page 20