U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

26–386 2018

FUTURE OF EMERGENCY ALERTING 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MAY 17, 2017 

Serial No. 115–31 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

energycommerce.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

Chairman 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

Vice Chairman 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, Washington 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

DAVID B. MCKINLEY, West Virginia 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana 

MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma 

RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

MIMI WALTERS, California 

RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

Ranking Member 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

BEN RAY LUJA ́ N, New Mexico 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, III, Massachusetts 

TONY CA ́ RDENAS, California 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

SCOTT H. PETERS, California 

DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

Chairman 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

Vice Chairman 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

SUSAN W. BROOKS, Tennessee 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

MIMI WALTERS, California 

RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio) 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

Ranking Member 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey (ex 

officio) 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hon. Marsha Blackburn, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Tennessee, opening statement ............................................................................ 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 3 

Hon. Michael F. Doyle, a Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth 

of Pennsylvania, opening statement ................................................................... 4 

Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6 

Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State of 

New Jersey, opening statement .......................................................................... 6 

WITNESSES

Sam Matheny, Chief Technology Officer, National Association of Broadcasters ................................................................................................................... 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 11 

Farrokh Khatibi, Ph.D., Director of Engineering, Qualcomm Technology .......... 20 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 22 

Christopher Guttman-McCabe, CEO, CGM Advisors, Llc, On behalf of Advanced Computer and Communications, LLC ................................................... 31 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 33 

SUBMITTED MATERIAL

Statement of the American Cable Association ...................................................... 63 

(1) 

FUTURE OF EMERGENCY ALERTING 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m., in room 

2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Marsha Blackburn 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Blackburn, Lance, Shimkus, Latta, 

Guthrie, Olson, Bilirakis, Johnson, Long, Flores, Brooks, Collins, 

Walters, Costello, Walden (ex officio), Doyle, Welch, Clarke, Eshoo, 

Butterfield, Matsui, McNerney, and Pallone (ex officio). 

Staff Present: Ray Baum, Staff Director; Chuck Flint, Policy Coordinator, Communications and Technology; Adam Fromm, Director of Outreach and Coalitions; Gene Fullano, Detailee, Communications and Technology; Giulia Giannangeli, Legislative Clerk, 

Digital, Commerce, and Consumer Protection/Communications and 

Technology; Kelsey Guyselman, Counsel, Communications and 

Technology; A.T. Johnston, Senior Policy Advisor, Energy; Lauren 

McCarty, Counsel, Communications and Technology; Alex Miller, 

Video Production Aide and Press Assistant; Dan Schneider, Press 

Secretary; Hamlin Wade, Special Advisor, External Affairs; Everett 

Winnick, Director of Information Technology; Jeff Carroll, Minority 

Staff Director; Alex Debianchi, Minority Telecom Fellow; David 

Goldman, Minority Chief Counsel, Communications and Technology; Jerry Leverich, Minority Counsel; Lori Maarbjerg, Minority 

FCC Detailee; Dan Miller, Minority Policy Analyst; Matt 

Schumacher, Minority Deputy Press Secretary and Digital Director; 

and Andrew Souvall, Minority Director of Communications, Outreach and Member Services. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The Subcommittee on Communications and 

Technology will now come to order. And I recognize myself for 5 

minutes for an opening statement. 

I do want to welcome each of you and say good morning because 

it is a good morning here in D.C., and welcome you to our hearing, 

the ‘‘Future of Emergency Alerting,’’ and to think about how important this topic is. 

One data point that we should each celebrate is that the first abducted child to be rescued by an AMBER Alert in 1998 is about to 

2 

graduate from high school, and in that thought, we extend our congratulations to Miss Rae Leigh Bradbury of Fort Worth, Texas, 

who was that first child who was rescued by an AMBER Alert. 

I do want to thank our witnesses that are here today. This committee’s commitment to advancing public safety communications is 

well established. Recently, FirstNet announced the award of a contract to AT&T that will bring state-of-the-art interoperable 

broadband communications to our Nation’s first responders. The 

legislation that got us there reflects the bipartisan work of this 

committee under Chairman Walden’s leadership, and we thank 

him for that leadership. 

The committee examined Next Gen 911 services and listened to 

testimony regarding the challenges and benefits of bringing the robust capabilities of IP-based technology to our Nation’s public safety answering points. 

This morning, we have an opportunity to hear about a third critical component of public safety communications, which is emergency alerting. Outfitting first responders with the capabilities of 

broadband communications is essential. In those times when catastrophe looms in the lives of hundreds, thousands, or maybe even 

millions are at risk or a child is missing, the necessity of ensuring 

the best available tools are available to local, state, and federal authorities to alert the public cannot be understated. 

We all know the stories from tornadoes that are ripping through 

communities, hurricanes that devastate the coast, earthquakes, 

even acts of terrorism that weigh heavily on our collective consciousness of just how dangerous the world can be. Where do we 

find comfort? With the knowledge that those that have dedicated 

their lives to protecting ours are able to notify us and steer us from 

harm’s way. 

How do they go about doing this? This morning, we will hear 

about the Emergency Alert System, EAS, a broadcast-based mechanism that has been around for decades and serves as the Nation’s 

primary alerting tool. 

Recently, FEMA and its partners performed a nationwide test, 

the second in history. We will hear about the outcome and the lessons learned. We will be introduced to a new television broadcast 

transmission standard, ATSC 3.0, that the broadcast television industry has sought authorization from the FCC to deploy. Among 

other things, it appears to offer capabilities that could bring significant improvements to emergency alerting. I would like to understand what those are and the impact it will have on EAS. 

We will hear about wireless emergency alerts, the mechanism 

that brings us alerts through our mobile devices. Mr. Shimkus was 

the lead sponsor of the WARN Act, the legislation that established 

that mechanism in 2006, and we thank him for that leadership. 

Since then, we have come to increasingly rely on our smartphones. 

Today, we will hear how continued technological innovation 

promises to make WEA a more significant component of alerting. 

Finally, we are going to explore the role of social media. We have 

seen firsthand the power of Twitter and Facebook, as well as others 

in this space. Yet while social media has been used as a tool by 

public safety, there are concerns regarding such things as trustworthiness and security. 

3 

Having the most effective means to reach our citizens in times 

of emergency is a goal we all share. Today’s panel will inform us 

on what is and what might be as the Nation’s alerting capabilities 

evolve. 

I now recognize the subcommittee ranking member, Mr. Doyle, 

for 5 minutes for an opening statement. 

[The prepared statement of Mrs. Blackburn follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN

Good morning and welcome to the Communications and Technology Subcommittee’s hearing titled: the ‘‘Future of Emergency Alerting.’’ How important a topic is 

this? The first abducted child to be rescued by an Amber Alert back in 1998 is about 

to graduate from high-school. Congratulations to Ms. Rae Leigh Bradbury of Fort 

Worth. And let me thank our witnesses for appearing here today to offer your expertise. 

This Committee’s commitment to advancing public safety communications is well 

established. Recently, FirstNet announced the award of a contract to AT&T that 

will bring state-of-the-art interoperable broadband communications to our Nation’s 

First Responders. The legislation that got us there reflects the bipartisan work of 

this Committee under Chairman Walden’s leadership. The Committee examined 

Next Generation 911 services and listened to testimony regarding the challenges 

and benefits of bringing the robust capabilities of IP-based technology to our nation’s Public Safety Answering Points. This morning we have an opportunity to hear 

about a third critical component of public safety communications—emergency alerting. 

Outfitting first responders with the robust capabilities of broadband communications is essential. In those times when catastrophe looms and the lives of hundreds, 

thousands, even millions—are at risk or a child is missing, the necessity of ensuring 

the best available tools are available to local, state and federal authorities to alert 

the public cannot be understated. 

We all know stories—tornadoes ripping through the heartland, hurricanes devastating our coasts, earthquakes, even acts of terrorism weigh heavy on our collective consciousness of just how dangerous the world can be. Where do we find comfort—with the knowledge that those that have dedicated their lives to protecting 

ours are able to notify us and steer us from harm’s way. 

How do they go about doing this? 

This morning we will hear about the emergency alert system—EAS—a broadcast 

based mechanism that has been around for decades and serves as the nation’s primary alerting tool. Recently, FEMA and its partners performed a nationwide test— 

the second in its history. We will hear about the outcome and lessons learned. 

We will be introduced to a new television broadcast transmission standard—ATSC 

3.0 that the broadcast television industry has sought authorization from the FCC 

to deploy. Among other things, it appears to offer capabilities that could bring significant improvements to emergency alerting. I’d like to understand what they are 

and how they impact EAS. 

We will hear about Wireless Emergency Alerts—the mechanism that brings us 

alerts through our mobile devices. Mr. Shimkus was the lead sponsor of the WARN 

Act, the legislation that established that mechanism in 2006. Since then we have 

come to increasingly rely on our smart phones. Today we will hear how continued 

technological innovation promises to make WEA a more significant component of 

alerting. 

Finally, we will explore the role of social media. We have seen first-hand the 

power of Twitter and Facebook as well as others in this space. Yet, while social 

media has been used as a tool by public safety, there are concerns regarding such 

things as trustworthiness and security. 

Having the most effective means to reach our citizens in times of emergency is 

a goal we all share. Today’s panel will inform us on what is and what might be, 

as the nation’s alerting capabilities evolve. Thank you. 

4 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL F. DOYLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH 

OF PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I want to thank the 

witnesses for being here today. I believe emergency alerts are a 

critical issue for our country and our constituents, and I look forward to the hearing today. 

Advances in emergency alerts have enabled greater flexibility, 

targeting, and effectiveness, and I am proud of the legislation that 

was passed out of this committee and has been adopted by industry 

and consumers alike. Wireless alerts provide detailed and timely 

messages to the devices that we carry and keep close to us every 

moment of the day. 

Additionally, I am happy to see a representative from the broadcasters here. The commitment that broadcasters have had to emergency alerts and local reporting in times of emergency is commendable. For far too long this has been the only way that people have 

been able to get information about emergencies and events in their 

regions. 

I will be interested to hear about the impact the new proposed 

television standard could have on broadcast alerts. That being said, 

I still have concerns about this proposed transition to a new broadcast standard and the impact it could have on working families and 

seniors. 

The last time we changed broadcast standards, Congress, the 

FCC, and the Department of Commerce partnered with industry to 

inform people and ensure that citizens were not left behind by a 

change in technology. As we embark on this next transition, it is 

critical that we work together to do the same thing. 

That being said, I am concerned about the timing of this hearing. 

The FCC, at its open meeting tomorrow, will vote to advance an 

order that will roll back essential rules that protect and promote 

a free and open internet. There are already 1.6 million comments 

on the record. 

This committee has yet to hold a public hearing at this Congress 

to address the proposed changes, nor has this committee held an 

oversight hearing of the FCC itself, one of the primary agencies 

this subcommittee is charged with overseeing. This issue is one of 

many that this subcommittee should be discussing with the Commission. 

Since the Commission is made up of unelected appointees, as the 

majority repeatedly pointed out over the last 8 years, it is critical 

that they be held accountable by Congress. 

Last Congress, this subcommittee had no trouble bringing the 

FCC up here to testify, with some commissioners joking that they 

should receive frequent flyer miles for the frequency of their visits. 

Now, with the Commission on the brink of considering an enormously unpopular and ill-advised proposal that could have farreaching implications on the most innovative part of our economy, 

it seems irresponsible not for Congress to provide the much needed 

oversight. 

Ranking Member Pallone and I have recently sent a letter to the 

Commission requesting that they extend the comment period for 

open internet NPRM. I am concerned that denying citizens and 

5 

stakeholders sufficient opportunity to comment on this proceeding 

will only prevent the Commission from seeing how deeply unpopular and ill-advised this course of action is. 

Additionally, along with my colleagues Anna Eshoo and Doris 

Matsui, we recently sent a letter requesting a hearing on the proposed Sinclair-Tribune merger. This merger, coupled with the 

FCC’s recent action to reinstate the UHF discount, has the potential to enormously increase consolidation of media ownership in 

this country. 

It is my hope that the majority and Chairman Blackburn will 

work with us to schedule a hearing to address the issues surrounding this proposed merger. 

Madam Chair, I would like to ask unanimous consent that a letter from the American Cable Association be placed in the record. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. So ordered. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you. 

And with that, I will yield back my time. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

At this time, I recognize the chairman of the full committee, Mr. 

Walden, for 5 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Mr. WALDEN. I thank the chairman for her leadership on these 

and other issues involving communications. 

I want to strike out a little personal privilege here to recognize 

and commend our long-time counsel on the subcommittee, Mr. 

David Redl. The announcement that the administration intends to 

appoint him to head up the NTIA, that announcement came out 

last night. He has been an incredibly valuable part of our efforts 

on communication law, and I think we owe him a round of applause for his new endeavor. 

And he is not here. Appropriately he is hiding out in the back, 

I think, but David has done a terrific job, so thank you, David. 

I think I can say without a doubt I am the only chairman of the 

Energy and Commerce Committee that has ever actually wired in 

an emergency alert system. Having been a radio station owner and 

operator and full engineer from time to time, I am very familiar 

with EAS and its predecessor, the EBS, and the importance of the 

work that has been done over the years to provide emergency communication to our citizens. 

I want to commend Mr. Shimkus, who has gone up to the other 

hearing, I believe, for his work in transitioning America’s laws over 

into the wireless world as well, where we communicate. Well, actually, radio was the original wireless world. 

Today, we are going to look at all of this and look forward. As 

you know, our work, in a bipartisan way, Ms. Eshoo and I, moving 

forward on the spectrum auction that allowed the facilitation of the 

creation of FirstNet, which also funded it when the auction was 

successful. 

As we move forward, we want to make sure that our first responder community and the citizens that they serve and protect 

6 

have access to the latest technologies and that that is an evolving 

course, not something that is just simply locked in. 

We have come a long way since the 1950s with EBS, and now 

we are into this new age. And we need to make sure that Federal 

policy doesn’t inhibit technological advancement, and we need to 

make sure that we are providing the help that our first responders 

need and that broadcasters use and cablecasters and others when 

it comes to making sure that people are notified. 

So I look forward to your testimony today. I thank the chairman 

for her leadership on this subcommittee. And with that, I yield 

back the balance of my time. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Walden follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN

Today’s hearing will examine the future of emergency alerting system and the 

mechanisms used to provide the public with life-saving information. Emergency 

alerting has come a long way since it was established in 1951, the Integrated Public 

Alert and Warning System now reaches people via broadcast, cable, satellite, and 

mobile devices. I look forward to our witnesses giving us a better picture of the successes and advances of this life-saving technology. 

Back in December the state of Oregon, specifically, my district was hit with a severe storm and flooding. Emergency alerting was there to notify Oregonians who 

were in the path of the storm. As a result, my constitutes were given time to prepare and remove themselves from potential danger. Providing emergency alert and 

warning information to the public before, during, and after incidents and disasters 

is a key component to our emergency system. 

Every one of us has had a natural disaster, extreme weather, or AMBER alter 

occur within our district, countless lives have been saved due to emergency alerting. 

Alerts are a critical part of our emergency infrastructure and they have changed significantly changed over the last 20 years. Today, there are different delivery mechanisms being implemented simultaneously which create the tools that are essential 

to saving lives. 

We are committed to seeing the alerting systems be both more effective and responsive to all communities, particularly those that have been historically underserved. As the world changes and becomes more interconnected our emergency altering delivery mechanisms must continue to grow and work together. 

As technology continues to advance, authorities can deliver alerts simultaneously 

through multiple communications devices reaching as many people as possible to 

save lives and protect property. It is important to advance current and future emergency altering as we move forward in a rapidly changing world. I look forward to 

hearing your testimony and how to foster innovation of this important technology. 

Thank you for being here this morning. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

Would anyone like the balance of Mr. Walden’s time? 

No one seeking that time, I recognize Mr. Pallone for 5 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY 

Mr. PALLONE. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I also want to 

thank you and our ranking member, Mr. Doyle, for having this important hearing today. 

But before I turn to the matter of the hearing, I wanted to quickly address FCC’s efforts to strip away consumers net neutrality 

protections at tomorrow’s FCC meeting. FCC Chairman Pai has 

proposed a plan that would kill net neutrality, and the chairman’s 

proposal will have a chilling influence on our democracy, cut away 

7 

at our connections with each other, and limit economic opportunities for the future. 

It is no wonder that more than 1 million comments have already 

been submitted, and I would urge the Commission to listen to the 

American people and reconsider this misguided approach. 

Getting back to today’s hearing, President Truman created our 

Nation’s first emergency alert system in 1951, in part, to ensure 

Americans will be prepared in the event of a nuclear strike. It is 

hard to overstate the importance of emergency alerts, whether it is 

preparing us for the impending landfall of a devastating hurricane, 

telling us to seek shelter from a tornado, or letting us know there 

is an active shooter nearby, getting up-to-the-minute information 

saves lives. And the need for alerts, unfortunately, is now greater 

as we face the sobering realities of climate change and as mass 

shootings appear more frequently than ever. 

The people in my district know this too well. The emergency 

alerts that were sent out ahead of Superstorm Sandy was one important way officials helped people along the New Jersey shore 

evacuate and prepare. Going above and beyond just passing along 

alerts, one radio station called the RAT stayed on the air during 

the storm to help reunite families and get people to safety. 

Alerts also helped to get the word out last year when a bomb was 

detonated in Seaside Park, New Jersey, and several more bombs 

were found at a train station in Elizabeth. Authorities in New York 

and New Jersey used mobile alerts to enlist the public’s help to 

find the suspect. 

Now with the advent of new technologies, Americans deserve better, more detailed information to help keep them safe wherever 

they are when disaster strikes. 

But new technologies won’t save lives if they aren’t useful and 

available to everyone. We need to ensure existing systems are free 

from interference, and we must test and evaluate these systems to 

make sure that they get the job done. Unfortunately, that is not 

something we have always been good at. 

As I mentioned, the first nationwide alerting system was created 

in 1951, but we didn’t test the nationwide system until 2011, 60 

years later. The results of that test were abysmal, and entire states 

didn’t even receive the test alerts. 

Today, we are here to learn about the status and future of public 

safety and what is being done in the name of saving more American lives. When it comes to public safety, we always must ask ourselves how many lives we are saving, not how many products companies are selling. 

And with that, I would like to yield the rest of my time to Ms. 

Matsui. 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Pallone, for 

yielding me time. 

Public safety is our first and foremost responsibility to the American public. As technology advances, we should use these innovations to improve emergency communications to our constituents. 

I am glad that the subcommittee is focusing on these important 

issues, but I also believe there are many other pressing issues that 

deserve our subcommittee’s immediate attention. Tomorrow, the 

8 

FCC is set to vote to begin the process of rolling back the net neutrality rules, which is a real threat to the free and open internet. 

Yesterday, I join my colleagues, Representative Doyle and Eshoo, 

to ask for a hearing on the proposed Sinclair-Tribune merger, 

which could have damaging consequences for local newsrooms. It is 

our responsibility to conduct oversight of these major regulatory decisions and changes in the marketplace. I urge my Republican colleagues to work with us to do so. 

And I yield more time here. 

Mr. PALLONE. Yes, I will yield the minute that is left to Mr. 

McNerney. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you. 

I also want to express my deep concerns about the FCC/Chairman Pai’s proposal to undo the net neutrality rules. Strong net 

neutrality rules are vital to the more than 31,000 small businesses 

in my district. Abandoning these rules will make it much harder 

for a small business owner to get his or her business off the ground 

and successfully compete in the marketplace. 

Additionally, I am concerned about the short public comment periods. It is critical that this period be extended so that all parties, 

including small businesses, have sufficient time to participate in 

the process and express their views. 

It is my opinion that reducing the net neutrality rules will continue to harm the economy, so we need to make sure that those 

rules are enforced, that they are in place, and that small businesses have a chance to take an opportunity of the vital internet 

services that really have created so much economy in our country 

in the last decade or two. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

This concludes member opening statements. And I will remind 

everyone that pursuant to the committee rules, all members’ opening statements will be made a part of the record. 

We want to thank our witnesses for being here today and for 

submitting your testimony in a timely manner. That allows us to 

prepare, and we will look forward to hearing from you with your 

opening statements and then following with our questions. 

Our witness panel for today’s hearing includes Mr. Sam 

Matheny, who is the Chief Technology Officer for National Association of Broadcasters; Dr. Farrokh Khatibi, who is the Director of 

Engineering at Qualcomm Technology; and Mr. Christopher 

Guttman-McCabe, who is the Chief Executive Officer for CGM Advisors. Chris is testifying on behalf of the Advanced Computer and 

Communications Company. 

We appreciate that you are all here. And we will begin with you, 

Mr. Matheny, for 5 minutes for your testimony. 

9 

STATEMENTS OF SAM MATHENY, CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS; 

FARROKH KHATIBI, PH.D., DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING, 

QUALCOMM TECHNOLOGY; AND CHRISTOPHER GUTTMANMCCABE, CEO, CGM ADVISORS, LLC, ON BEHALF OF ADVANCED COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATIONS, LLC 

STATEMENT OF SAM MATHENY 

Mr. MATHENY. Good morning. And thank you, Chairman Blackburn and Ranking Member Doyle, for inviting me here, as well as 

all of the members of the subcommittee. My name is Sam Matheny, 

and I am the chief technology officer at the National Association 

of Broadcasters. I appreciate this opportunity to testify today on 

the unique and important role that local broadcasters play as first 

informers during times of emergency and how the innovations of 

Next Gen TV will enhance that ability. 

I bring an on-the-ground perspective to this issue from my nearly 

20 years of experience with Capitol Broadcasting Company, parent 

to WRAL-TV in Raleigh, North Carolina. Like WRAL, all NAB 

members, the thousands of free local radio and television broadcasters in your hometowns take seriously their role as the most 

trusted source of news and emergency updates. 

Whether it is preparing listeners and viewers for the coming 

storm, directing them to needed supplies and shelter during the 

disaster, or helping towns and cities rebuild in the aftermath, local 

stations are part of the communities they serve. And local radio 

and TV stations are sometimes the only available communication 

mediums in an emergency when cell phones and wireless networks 

fail. In fact, a new poll was released today by Morning Consult reaffirming that broadcasters are the number one medium that the 

American people turn to in times of emergency by a factor of nearly 

4 to 1. 

This unique combination of trust and reliability is why, in addition to our ongoing comprehensive news coverage of emergencies, 

broadcasters form the backbone of the Emergency Alert System, 

EAS. EAS connects over-the-air broadcast radio, television, and 

cable systems to communicate critical safety information to the 

public during sudden, unpredictable, or unforeseen events. 

These capabilities can be enhanced by a station’s voluntary upgrade to Next Gen TV, which will enable significant lifesaving advances in emergency communications. One need look no further 

than the recent tragic fire in Gatlinburg, Tennessee, or the destruction caused by Hurricane Sandy to appreciate the vital role of a reliable communications infrastructure in a time of crisis. 

I would now like to share some of the capabilities of Next Gen 

TV through a video demonstration. If we could play the video, 

please. 

So what you are going to see here when the video begins playing 

is you are watching a basketball game, and an emergency alert, an 

advanced emergency alert is going to appear. And rather than seeing the normal text that you would see scrolling, what you have 

here is an ammonia gas leak and a HAZMAT alert. But you also 

see a menu of items that are available under that alert notice. And 

so the user has access to a lot more information. 

10 

In this case, we are actually presenting a map of the area that 

is impacted by the ammonia gas leak so you can visually see what 

is there, as well as a list of the neighborhoods in that community 

that are impacted. 

From that, you can also see that just to the right, a video on-demand file started playing. So instead of the basketball game, you 

are now watching a piece of content that was downloaded in the 

background that is specific to the emergency that is taking place 

where you can get really detailed information. 

As we go to shelter-in-place, which is what the recommendation 

for is in this emergency, you see what it means to shelter-in-place, 

specific instructions on what you should do in terms of staying inside, in terms of turning off your ventilation systems and protecting yourself. 

But if you do feel impacted, you might need first aid, and this 

is what it tells you what you need to do. In this case, the advice 

is to seek immediate medical attention, so therefore you also have 

hospital information as well as wait times. So all of this is being 

included in this single advanced emergency alert, as well as the additional information you see here on numbers where you can call 

to get assistance. 

Now, had this been an AMBER Alert, you might see the picture 

of the missing child, you might see a picture of the suspect, or a 

map of where they were last seen. So there is a great deal of information that can be presented in an advanced emergency alert 

using Next Gen TV. 

The next step in making these improvements a reality is FCC 

approval of the petition that NAB jointly filed with America’s Public Television Stations, the Consumer Technology Association, and 

the Advanced Warning and Response Network Alliance. 

Before I conclude, I want to mention one important item within 

the oversight jurisdiction of this subcommittee: the recently completed broadcast incentive auction. The FCC has begun the process 

of relocating or repacking the nearly 1,000 broadcast television stations. Put simply, the $1.75 billion repack budget and 39-month 

timeline are likely insufficient for such a massive endeavor, and 

congressional action is needed. 

Thank you again for inviting me here today. I look forward to answering any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Matheny follows:] 

11 


26386.001
12 


26386.002
13 


26386.003
14 


26386.004
15 


26386.005
16 


26386.006
17 


26386.007
18 


26386.008
19 


26386.009
20 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

Dr. Khatibi, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF FARROKH KHATIBI, PH.D. 

Mr. KHATIBI. Chairman Blackburn and Ranking Member Doyle, 

thank you for affording Qualcomm the opportunity to participate in 

today’s hearing. 

Qualcomm is a licensor of highly innovative wireless technology 

and manufacturer of cutting edge chips of wireless devices. 

My name is Farrokh Khatibi, director of engineering at 

Qualcomm. I have been actively involved in the development of 

Wireless Emergency Alert, WEA, standards since early 2007. 

Recently, I was the co-lead of CSRIC V Working Group 2 on 

emergency alerting platforms where we completed three reports on 

WEA security, social media and complementary alerting methods, 

and wireless emergency alert and geo-targeting. 

By the way of background, WEA grew out of the Warning, Alert 

and Response Network, WARN Act, which became law as Title VI 

of the SAFE Ports Act in 2006. 

Taking advantage of the ubiquity of the mobile platform, Congress put in place a framework for wireless carriers to provide a 

voluntary public safety alerting system utilizing current wireless 

network technology. That system allows individuals to receive geotargeted text-like messages alerting them of imminent threat to 

safety in their area. The alerts can be originated from local, state, 

or Federal agencies. 

The WEA system represents a successful partnership of public 

and private entities. Since its launch in 2012, WEA has benefited 

American wireless subscribers in a number of instances in which 

WEA has alerted citizens in the path of impending natural disasters, assisted in the rescue of abducted children, and issued shelter-in-place information during public safety incidents. 

Currently, there are three types of alerts sent through the system: alerts issued by the President of the United States; alerts involving imminent threat to safety of life issued in two different categories, extreme threats and severe threat; and of course, AMBER 

Alerts. 

With your permission, I would like to highlight two important aspects of WEA. First, emergency alerts are broadcast only to the cell 

towers in the coverage area that best match the zone of an emergency. All WEA-capable phones that are in that coverage area of 

the cell site in the zone will receive WEA. 

The second important aspect of WEA is that it uses cellular technology and the wireless provider network to broadcast from cell 

towers to mobile devices in the area. Broadcasting the alert ensures an efficient and timely distribution of the alert compared to 

sending the alerts point to point, such as SMS. 

The wireless industry has worked for years to evolve the service 

to add new and greater capabilities. For example, after careful coordination with alert originators and our Federal partners, the 

wireless industry is taking steps to offer capabilities that will include extending the alert message length from 90 to 360 characters 

for 4G LTE; improving geo-targeting; including embedded references, such as URLs and phone numbers, in WEA messages; add 

21 

a new alert category for public safety information messages; add 

Spanish language alerts; providing state/local alert originators the 

ability to conduct individual tests of the WEA system in their jurisdiction. 

The wireless industry is committed to enhancing WEA. To that 

end, the industry has taken the lead to study potential future enhancements to WEA, such as enhancement to end-to-end security, 

event codes, and device-assisted geo-targeting. 

Chairman Blackburn and Ranking Member Doyle, thank you 

again for the opportunity to participate in today’s hearing. 

Qualcomm looks forward to working with the wireless industry, the 

FCC, the subcommittee, FEMA, and others in the public safety 

community to ensure that WEA continues to offer a unique and 

useful way to help protect the American public. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Khatibi follows:] 

22 


26386.010
23 


26386.011
24 


26386.012
25 


26386.013
26 


26386.014
27 


26386.015
28 


26386.016
29 


26386.017
30 


26386.018
31 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. We thank you. 

Mr. Guttman-McCabe, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER GUTTMAN-MCCABE 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. Thank you. And good morning, Chairman Blackburn, Ranking Member Doyle, and members of the subcommittee. It is a privilege and honor to appear before you today 

to discuss the future of emergency alerts. 

During my testimony, I will wear two hats. Most importantly, I 

will represent AC&C, a small business technology company based 

in Baton Rouge, founded in 1991, that has developed a transformational software upgrade that I believe will drive the next 

iteration of wireless emergency alerting. 

In addition to representing AC&C, I also appear before you as an 

early advocate of the wireless emergency alert service. This issue 

is close to my heart. Today’s hearing marks the seventh time that 

I will appear before Congress to discuss, at least in part, the issue 

of wireless emergency alerts. 

I first tackled this issue working on the WARN Act with Representative Shimkus and his team—thank you, sir—and I was part 

of the original committee that developed the framework for the 

WEA service. The emergency alerting platform has evolved in the 

years since the adoption of the WARN Act. It will evolve further 

with the recent actions of the FCC and with the industry’s commitments in the recent CSRIC V. 

Still more will be done after Chairman Pai’s leadership when the 

FCC finalizes its further notice of proposed rulemaking that focuses on the upgrades involving device-assisted geo-targeting. 

When implemented, that upgrade will dramatically transform the 

service. 

I am not alone in this thinking. Public safety representatives 

from across the country have identified the need to be able to more 

accurately geo-target alerts as the single most important upgrade 

that could happen to the WEA service. 

The Big City Emergency Managers organization, which represents the 15 largest cities in the country, said it succinctly: Simply put, device-based geo-targeting provides the lightest lift with 

the biggest return. 

AC&C, the company I represent, has designed and developed a 

device-based geo-targeting solution entitled PG Alert. It leverages 

the current cell broadcast technology to push information to the 

general alert area, and the device takes over using its location 

awareness to decide who the alert is relevant for and how the alert 

is displayed on the device. The device can then compare its physical location to the alert area coordinates and play the message 

only when the person is within the alert area. 

For consumers, the upgrade will confirm why the person is receiving the alert by showing the device’s position within the alert 

area on a well-defined map. For public safety alert originators, the 

most significant benefit will be the ability to contain alert messages 

to their jurisdiction regardless of size. This will make the system 

effective for alerts of any size—buildings, streets, college campuses, 

and more—and will remove the over-alerting problem. 

32 

For wireless carriers, AC&C’s product is a low-cost software upgrade to WEA that not only will address most of public safety’s 

calls for improvements to the service, but also will enable the industry to take advantage of the cell broadcast technology that exists in their networks. 

Additionally, the ability to precisely geo-target alerts will limit 

the network impact of the WEA service, particularly as carriers 

begin to include URLs and other embedded information in the 

WEA message. 

We at AC&C are not alone in thinking that this device-enhanced 

upgrade makes sense. In September, then Commissioner, now 

Chairman Pai, stated that citizens and public safety officials alike 

are opting out of the wireless system altogether. 

According to Chairman Pai, the city of Seattle says that it 

doesn’t use WEA because of over alerting. The city of Houston says 

that it has shied away from using WEA because of the high likelihood of over alerting. Harris County, Texas, reports that it chose 

not to use WEA during four recent disasters solely due to significant concerns over the granularity of alerts. 

Chairman Pai said we need to do more than just codify the status quo, and he drove the FCC in the September order to move 

ahead with a device-based approach to geo-targeting, and in the attached FNPRM to, quote, additional comment on ways we can implement our commitment to device-assisted geo-targeting. 

In December, AT&T added support to the idea of device-assisted 

geo-targeting, suggesting that a managed WEA application on the 

device could be the solution as it could take the WEA message and 

then, quote, determine the handset’s location using existing capabilities and APIs already available in the mobile device. Once the 

managed WEA app has identified the handset’s location, it can determine whether the handset is in the alert area and display the 

message. The handset is not in the area, it can ignore the message. 

In conclusion, we believe that the future of wireless emergency 

alerting is in the device, and that future is bright. We understand 

that the industry is working on a device-enhanced upgrade to the 

WEA service, and we look forward to continuing to work with the 

industry and the FCC to integrate the intelligence of the mobile device into the WEA service. 

It is our belief that these device-enhanced capabilities will provide significant consumer, public safety, and wireless industry benefits, and help future-proof the WEA service. 

I again thank you for the invitation to provide my thoughts on 

the future of emergency alerts, and I welcome any questions that 

you might have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Guttman-McCabe follows:] 

33 


26386.019
34 


26386.020
35 


26386.021
36 


26386.022
37 


26386.023
38 


26386.024
39 


26386.025
40 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you all for your testimony. And now we 

are ready for the test portion of this hearing, right? We get to ask 

the questions and you all get to give us the answers. 

Dr. Khatibi, I am coming to you first. Mr. Matheny pointed out 

the Gatlinburg fires and talked about that as one of his examples 

of the WEA alerts and some being impeded by network congestion. 

That is understandable. A catastrophe happens, everybody wants 

as much information as they can get, people are trying to find family, networks get clogged, and so you have got a strain on the network. 

I want you to just discuss this, the situation, the process, and 

then the upgrades that you see as necessary for continuity and for 

information flow during those times. 

Mr. KHATIBI. Thank you, Chairman Blackburn. So as I mentioned in my testimony, we are working on evolving the WEA technology as it is today, so we are adding more capabilities to it. For 

example, we are going from 90 to 360 characters, potentially allowing URLs and phone numbers so that people can get more information on it. And so the industry is in a continued mode of evolving 

the technology to serve public safety. 

But in addition to that, I would like to point out that the way 

I look at public safety is a big puzzle, and we are being part of it. 

So ATSC 3.0, other services would all complete that picture. So 

from the perspective of having public safety, I think is all these 

pieces combined together which form the public safety tools that we 

need to provide to our customers. 

So we are evolving WEA as well as enabling other technologies 

to it and improve, in addition to what we are doing. 

And as I said, for example, addition of 360 characters, the public 

safety community has come to us and say that is very important 

to them and that would allow them to provide a lot more information to the public. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. 

Mr. KHATIBI. Thank you. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you. 

Mr. Matheny, back in 2011, Gordon Smith told this subcommittee that the NAB—he was speaking on behalf of the NAB— 

did not seek any sort of mandate for mobile devices to incorporate 

a DTV. And as the industry transitions to the ATSC 3.0, is it still 

the case that you prefer market forces as opposed to mandates to 

look at how we holistically address this? And so go ahead with 

that. 

Mr. MATHENY. Yes, absolutely, Chairman Blackburn, that is the 

case. We are not looking for a mandate of any sort. We believe that 

the benefits of Next Gen TV will be attractive enough for themselves, and that is why, if you look at the petition that we filed in 

concert with CTA and APTS, as well as AWARN Alliance, it is a 

voluntary move, and so we are not seeking a mandate. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. I want to have each of you answer something. We have talked a lot about the potential in emergency alerting, and what we have not talked about is how to educate consumers. And I want to bring this up because, as we are looking at 

broadband expansion, one of the things we hear about is adoption 

41 

rates and the necessity to educate consumers on the need for these 

adoption rates. 

But as we look at the different abilities and capabilities in the 

formats for getting the word out in times of tragedy and catastrophe, I think that education for the consumers is going to be an 

important part of this. So very quickly, since we have only got a 

half minute left, just go right down the line, what are you all doing 

to educate people on alert systems and how to use them? 

Mr. MATHENY. So I think local broadcasters are part of the communities that they serve, and through our free and local newscasts, 

we are in constant communication in educating folks about the possibilities. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. 

Mr. KHATIBI. That is an excellent question, and we are working 

very closely with FEMA and DHS to make sure that the consumer 

understands WEA and understand what to do as a result of that, 

so that is very important to us. Thank you. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. And, Chairman, I would agree with both 

of my colleagues’ statements. I would also add that it is very important for us to actually educate public safety alert originators. 

What we found on the WEA side is that less than 60 out of tens 

of thousands of potential alert originators have used the service in 

the last 7 years. So I think, primarily, we need to do some educating on the public safety side so in instances like Gatlinburg or 

the Orlando shootings or the floodings in Louisiana, that the local 

public safety entities actually use the service. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Did you say 60? 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. Sixty out of tens of thousands. Perhaps 

as many as 40,000 entities in the United States could sign up to 

use WEA and only—actually, I think the number is 52, so I am trying to be conservative and say 60, but I think only 52 have actually 

ever used it in 6 years. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. If you will, check those numbers and then get 

that back to us. 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. Certainly, Chairman. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. My time has concluded. 

Mr. Doyle for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Dr. Khatibi and Mr. Guttman-McCabe, in both of your testimonies, you discussed the new advanced wireless alerting features 

that the FCC voted to allow last year; for instance, longer messages, geo-targeting, public safety alerts, and Spanish language 

alerts. What is the timeline for these features coming online and 

how is the rollout going? 

Mr. KHATIBI. Ranking Member Mr. Doyle, Congressman Doyle, 

so we are working very closely with FCC. As a matter of fact, we 

had a call with FCC just a couple of weeks ago, and we have been 

scheduling weekly, sometimes twice a week meetings just to make 

sure they comply with the timeline that FCC had put forth to us. 

So we are very motivated, and we are trying to get the standards, which is the document that describe the technology, finished 

soon, within the next 6 to 9 months. And that has required a lot 

42 

of resources, and industry has put a lot of resources because we believe this is very critical. 

Mr. DOYLE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. And Ranking Member, some of it is happening sequentially. So some of the capabilities will be unlocked 

when the industry goes to 360 characters, and so I think that is 

sort of the lynchpin for some of the upgrades, not only that were 

in the order in September, but that are under consideration in the 

further notice that was released at the same time. 

Mr. DOYLE. And tell me, as part of the FCC’s further notice on 

this rulemaking, the Commission considered the addition of multimedia content, true multilingual support, including sign language. 

What are your thoughts on these proposed next steps? 

Mr. KHATIBI. And thank you. I may take that first? 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. Certainly. 

Mr. KHATIBI. I thought you may want me. 

So at this point, to support multimedia, we allow enabled URLs, 

which is basically a pointer to Web site, and that could potentially 

take you to a place where you can get additional multimedia resources available to you. 

And with respect to other languages, we are also working on 

Spanish language alerts to be available to areas where they have 

large Spanish language population. 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you. 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. And Ranking Member, the one thing 

that I would highlight from the FNPRM and one of the main focuses was on geo-targeting, the ability to target alerts to very precise areas. That, to me, public safety has been relentless in its pursuit of geo-targeting throughout the record, and so that perhaps is 

the most important in the FNPRM. 

Mr. DOYLE. And this is for all the witnesses. One issue I have 

been very passionate about over the years is working and supporting the autism community. Currently, a number of states support Silver Alerts for the elderly, those with dementia, and autistic 

individuals. And while these alerts are supported by the Emergency Alert System in several states, they are not supported by 

wireless alerts. 

I just want to ask the panel their thoughts on expanding the 

alerting system to include these alerts. 

I think we are all keenly aware of alerting fatigue, but when you 

have a friend or a family member or a loved one who is missing 

and could be a danger to themselves or to others, it seems critical 

that we use the tools available to us to address this issue. So I am 

just curious about the panel’s thoughts on this issue, Silver Alerts. 

Mr. MATHENY. So I can speak to my time at WRAL-TV, and I 

know that we published a number of Silver Alerts, either through 

actually publishing via EAS or addressing them in our own air 

news coverage, and so we think that is part of the service to the 

community. 

Mr. KHATIBI. Thank you. And from the WEA perspective, we 

would like to consider that as something that we need to work 

going forward. We haven’t done anything on it yet. We just recently 

added a number of new alerts, but we haven’t done the Silver 

43 

Alert. But with your permission, we would like to discuss that and 

see what we can do. 

Mr. DOYLE. Great. I would appreciate that. 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. Certainly. And it was not a type of alert 

that was established when the committee originally put together 

the framework for the three types of alerts. 

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Khatibi and Mr. Guttman-McCabe, wireless 

alerting has operated as an opt-in model for both carriers and consumers. What can you tell us about the effectiveness of this model 

and how have carriers done in implementing this model and how 

have consumers reacted? Is there sufficient consumer education for 

them so that they know this is an option that they can enable? And 

based on the numbers you were talking about, it doesn’t seem like 

many people are enabling these features. So how do we get more 

information out? 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. Certainly, Ranking Member. On the carrier side, it is a voluntary service. I believe strongly in that approach to these types of requirements, strongly enough that I wrote 

a law review article well after I left law school. Partway through 

the process, I wanted to shoot myself for having committed to that. 

But I believe strongly that you get the best and the brightest in 

the evolution of the system if you engage in industry, like the wireless industry and others, in a voluntary manner. So the carriers 

have done their part. They have jumped on board, and it is well 

disseminated. The carriers have done their part. 

On the consumer side, it is not. It is actually the opposite; it is 

opt out. So the system is designed that you will get the alerts, and 

you can opt out of two of the three. You cannot opt out of the Presidential alert, but you can opt out of the AMBER Alerts or the imminent threat. Oftentimes, we are quiet about that as an industry, 

as a society, because we don’t want people to actually opt out of 

the service. 

So it is in the phones the ability to opt out. We hope and pray 

that most people do not, because as much as it may bother you to 

be awakened at 2:00 in the morning, it is important, if it is an 

AMBER Alert, to the parents and to society that we find that child. 

Some people complain, but we hope people don’t opt out. The education, I believe, again, needs to be on the public safety side of the 

equation. 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you so much. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman’s time is expired. 

Chairman Walden for 5 minutes. 

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you. Again, thank you all for your testimony 

and for helping us out in these matters. 

Mr. Guttman-McCabe, given the difference in technical platforms, the inclination is discussed alerting in terms of technology 

silos like EAS or WEA. What are we missing when we approach 

emergency alerting in this manner? 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. I think it was either Mr. Matheny or Dr. 

Khatibi that said it earlier. I think we need a patchwork quilt of 

approaches, to be quite honest. I think many of us in this room 

probably have children. I have two teenage daughters. They spend 

a great deal of time on social media, troubles the heck out of me, 

but they do. 

44 

I think that they will get a fair amount of their information from 

social media, but I think that there needs to be a primary alerting 

mechanism like EAS, like WEA. And I don’t think we are missing 

anything at the moment. I do think we need to continue to evolve 

these services, and that is happening. 

Mr. WALDEN. OK. Obviously, you are well informed on all these 

matters. The FCC has proposed a list of upgrades to WEA, including multimedia alerting and multilingual alerting. Obviously, these 

sound like good additions, but are there other considerations that 

we should have that should be included in WEA alerts? 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. Certainly. And I know the industry is 

considering it. But currently, the way WEA is structured, is it 

treats the device, in essence, as a dumb terminal. So if an alert is 

broadcast using the cell broadcast system, if a device is in the area, 

place it. It doesn’t do anything to it. It doesn’t interpret it. It 

doesn’t decide if I should get it or shouldn’t get it. It doesn’t add 

any rich content to it. It doesn’t push you to a broadband connection. All of that is under consideration. 

And I think once we unlock the intelligence in the device, we will 

get an evolution of this service along the lines that Mr. Matheny 

is talking about with regard to ATSC 3.0. And so I do think we are 

going to see an evolution in the next several years as the intelligence in the handset comes in and we are able to take advantage 

of people’s choices on their device, like Spanish as the primary language, like text-to-speech if you have a disability, or larger font, 

things like that. 

Mr. WALDEN. Well, Mr. Matheny, you mention in your testimony 

the ability of Next Gen TVs to be awakened, woken up, to alert 

users even when they are powered off. I think the idea of devices 

in our homes that can be turned on remotely is probably a new one 

to a lot of consumers. Can you explain further how this 

functionality works? 

Mr. MATHENY. Sure. So thank you, Chairman Walden, for that 

question. I think that what you can think of is that your television 

will be turned off and it will actually be in sort of a sleep mode, 

and at the same time, it can still listen for a discreet, I am going 

to call it a beacon signal, that will then trigger it to turn on. And 

that is something that is new to Next Gen TV, and it is something 

that was very deliberately built in. 

And so what we think is that, truly, in a time of disaster emergency, that ability to wake up a device and to provide that, more 

info, and the types of targeted information that really makes it actionable, is vital and important and will save lives. 

Mr. WALDEN. Thinking back to my radio days, we had receivers 

that had a little device on them, a triggering switch so when they 

got the multitone actuator, it triggered a relay and turned on the 

audio. I guess that is all you are talking about here. 

Mr. MATHENY. Yes. We are talking about in a very specific situation of activating and turning on the device to present emergency 

alerts. 

Mr. WALDEN. Are TVs able to be turned on for other purposes? 

Mr. MATHENY. No. 

45 

Mr. WALDEN. OK. We hear these things about cameras on televisions and all that. Can you speak to any of that, since we are on 

this topic, in general terms? 

Mr. MATHENY. All I can speak to really is the capabilities of Next 

Generation television. The idea of having an internet connected or 

smart TV with other capabilities, that would fall outside of the 

realm of Next Gen TV, and those aren’t really items that I should 

speak to here. 

Mr. WALDEN. Got it. OK. 

I think that is all I have, Madam Chair, so I will turn it back 

to you. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields. 

All right. Mr. Pallone, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PALLONE. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Nearly 5 years ago, Hurricane Sandy ripped through the northeast, devastating so many people across the region. Radio and TV 

broadcasting played a crucial role in saving lives by letting people 

know how to stay out of harm’s way, and the role of broadcasting 

can’t be overstated. Losing this signal is simply unacceptable. 

And that’s why I released a discussion draft bill last year called 

the ‘‘Viewer Protection Act,’’ and this bill makes sure everyone can 

stay connected no matter what. I appreciate that some broadcasters are looking at new ways to deliver their content, but my 

goal, once again, will be to view this from the eye of a consumer. 

So I wanted to ask Mr. Matheny, can you commit that if the FCC 

adopts this new technology, no viewer in the country, especially the 

most vulnerable who can’t afford a new TV or new equipment, will 

lose their existing signal? 

Mr. MATHENY. Thank you, Ranking Member Pallone. One of the 

key aspects of the rollout of Next Gen TV is the idea of 

simulcasting, and so broadcasters will continue to broadcast in the 

current standard as Next Generation TV also rolls out, and we believe that no one will be disenfranchised. 

Mr. PALLONE. All right. And then let me ask. I mentioned earlier, oftentimes the best way to protect people is to make sure that 

they know how to get out of the way before a disaster strikes. In 

addition to receiving emergency alerts from broadcasting stations, 

another powerful way to inform people are through alerts on their 

cell phones through the wireless emergency alert system. 

So I wanted to ask Mr. Khatibi a few questions. I know that you 

have done a lot of work on the systems that deliver these wireless 

emergency alerts. How would the proposed new broadcast standard 

fit into that existing system? 

Mr. KHATIBI. Thank you for that question. As we discussed earlier, I think the whole public safety is a patchwork of different elements. So wireless emergency alert is designed to provide the consumer immediate information about the alert that they are receiving, about the incident. Beyond that, if there is a need to get additional information through broadcasting TV and so forth, that can 

complement WEA. 

So from our perspective, wireless emergency alert is the first line 

of defense where we get the information in a timely fashion, and 

then additional information, you can get it through the URL provided or through broadcasting. 

46 

Mr. PALLONE. Now, will consumers have to buy new TVs or other 

equipment to receive these new broadcast station alerts? 

Mr. KHATIBI. I would defer that to my colleague, Mr. Matheny. 

Mr. MATHENY. So to get an advanced emergency alert of the nature that we showed earlier, yes, that would be delivered via the 

Next Generation system. And so either a new TV set or a new 

tuner device would be required to receive the advanced alert. 

Mr. PALLONE. Now, what new advances are on the horizon for 

the wireless emergency alert system that will benefit consumers, 

and will these new features require consumers to buy new phones? 

Mr. KHATIBI. So if I may, I will take that one. So as I mentioned, 

there are a number of activities that we are including, for example, 

going from 90 to 360 characters, including other languages, such as 

Spanish, providing additional alert type messages. And a number 

of those do not require new handsets, but some of them may require handsets as they come into the market. But we are trying to 

create as many services as possible within the existing handsets 

that we have. Thank you. 

Mr. GUTTMAN-MCCABE. And Ranking Member, if I may, AT&T 

mentioned in December that there are other capabilities in the device that they believe should and ultimately, I believe, will be connected to WEA that will drive some of the rich content and some 

of the benefits that Mr. Matheny is talking about that are just software upgrades. So they wouldn’t require any additional equipment 

or change-out in devices. 

Mr. PALLONE. All right. Thank you very much. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

Mr. Lance, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you, Madam Chair. And good morning to the 

distinguished panel. 

And, Dr. Khatibi, I want you to know I was honored to be at 

Qualcomm in Somerset County in the district I serve last week, 

and I understood some of what I was shown, but not everything. 

It was very advanced, and I must say, your colleagues there are 

wonderful innovators and great scientists, and you should be very 

proud, as I am sure your colleagues on the panel are proud of their 

distinguished employees. 

And to you, Dr. Khatibi, following up on Congressman Pallone’s 

questioning, the hurricane in 2012 we call Sandy was devastating 

to our region of the country, as I am sure everyone in the room 

knows. Afterward, it became apparent, if it had not been apparent 

before the natural disaster, that there was great room for improvement. 

Do you think things would have been different, given technology 

advancements and upgrades made by carriers to WEA and to their 

networks since then? And I would be very interested in your views 

on this. 

Mr. KHATIBI. Thank you for that question. That is actually a very 

interesting question. You know, for example, let’s take a couple of 

examples, going from 90 to 360 characters. That provides the consumer more information in a timely fashion and potentially having 

different languages. So, part of our enhancement, part of our evolution is to understand what are the consumer requirements, what 

are the public safety views on what improvements should be made. 

47 

And as we go to 5G, et cetera, we continue to see and understand 

from our alert originators what are the features that we like to see, 

and that is part of our path going forward to include all those features. 

So for the last few years, we have been very closely working with 

FEMA and DHS to understand what are the characteristics they 

would like to see included, and we have been enhancing our system 

continuously to allow those features to happen. 

So the answer to your question is, yes, I believe all this enhancements that we are doing right now will surely, will have benefitted 

Sandy and other disasters that we have had, and we are hoping 

that in the path that we have going forward, going to 5G, et cetera, 

we will continue improving and addressing the needs. 

Mr. LANCE. And the sooner we get to 5G the better, I presume. 

Mr. KHATIBI. Absolutely, yes. We are putting a lot of resources 

to make sure that 5G is deployed as soon as possible, and more importantly, that 5G has the capabilities for public safety that we require and we expect. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you very much. And for the panel in general, 

is there a risk to innovation and to consumers if the FCC forces 

wireless providers to use a particular targeting technology? And 

perhaps we will start on this side of the panel. 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Certainly. I am not in favor of them forcing anything. 

Mr. LANCE. Nor am I. 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Yes. And I do believe that when you look 

at capabilities and you identify needs, the FCC’s job is to frame 

those needs, whether it is public safety’s needs or consumers’ 

needs, and I think that should be the focus. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you. Others who would like to comment? 

Mr. Matheny. 

Mr. MATHENY. I would just say that we are not in favor of mandates of that nature, and often, technology outpaces those types of 

things. And so we would like to be able to use the best available 

as we continue to innovate broadcasting. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you. I think it is the consensus of this subcommittee, it is certainly my belief that it is difficult for those in 

public policy to anticipate what is going to happen in technology. 

And the reason that we are as advanced as we are over the last 

20 years is based upon technology that tends to run ahead of statutory law. 

Finally, how do we balance the costs and burdens of the new capabilities that you have described the fact that Congress made 

WEA a voluntary service? 

Yes. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Sir, I think the word you use, balance, is 

the correct word. I do, again, believe this should be a voluntary 

service. And to your point earlier about if the FCC or Congress gets 

too granular in their requirements, often they miss the mark. 

First example was we believe when we set the service that you 

could overalert and that would be fine, because wireless consumers 

are mobile. What we missed as an industry was that public safety 

wouldn’t use it if you were overalerting because you would go outVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:22 Feb 01, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-31 CHRIS
48 

side of their constituency. So I do think there needs to be a balance. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you. I am over my time by 17 seconds. 

I yield back. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. And we will try to make it up. 

Mr. McNerney, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I thank the chairwoman. 

Mr. Matheny, I am impressed by the advancements of the ATSC 

3.0 standards. In fact, the examples that Mr. Gutman-McCabe gave 

about the geotargeting granularity was very impressive. But I am 

worried about affordability. 

In my district, over 21 percent of the households are living on an 

annual income of less than $25,000 a year. These individuals are 

not likely to be able to afford the new technology that is required, 

this means they won’t have the same access to improved lifesaving 

information in emergency circumstances. 

Mr. Matheny, how can we ensure that adopting the new standard will not further marginalize those who can’t afford these services? 

Mr. MATHENY. Thank you, Congressman. The key tenet of the 

transition plan is the idea of a simulcast. And so broadcasters will 

continue to broadcast in the current generation of standard while 

also beginning to broadcast in the next generation standard. And 

so that type of approach will keep everyone able to receive free 

local broadcasting with the emergency alerts and having access to 

information. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Well, the new K4 TV, for example, is going to 

cost a couple thousands dollars, at least initially. I don’t see how 

people can afford that. And it sounds like you are counting on that 

as part of your system, as a part of the safety system. 

Mr. MATHENY. So I think what we are trying to do in our approach is to transition to a new technology that is going to have 

greater capabilities while also making sure that no one is left behind and everyone has access to our broadcasters. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. It is good to know. 

Dr. Khartibi, how much do you anticipate the new standard chip 

will cost to manufacture? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. I am sorry, Congressman. I am not a technologist, 

so I don’t have any cost numbers available to me. So I cannot answer that question. I don’t have that number. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Well, would you anticipate the device potentially 

requiring other alterations in these devices and these other components are going to have to be altered as well? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Absolutely. So providing these features of public 

safety it is part of our schedule of features that is coming up. So 

our chips are getting more and more sophisticated as we go along. 

So adding those new features even all the way to 5G is going to 

be very small incremental. It is not that you are designing a new 

chip just for support public safety. We are designing a system, and 

that system for public safety will make sure that it is part of that 

evolution. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. OK. To change the subject a little bit, Mr. 

Khartibi. 

49 

The emergency alert system has been hacked into in the past, 

and I understand that the new standard will enable information to 

be pushed into a much wider range of connected devices. I am concerned that this has the potential for increased cybersecurity risk. 

Does the new standard address potential cybersecurity concerns? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Very good question, Congressman. 

So I was chairing at CSRIC V group on cybersecurity, and as 

part of that, we identified potential cybersecurity issues. And industry as a whole, we are making sure those cybersecurity issues 

are addressed. So we are working diligently to ensure that cybersecurity is addressed as we go forward. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Very good. 

Mr. Matheny, how are broadcasters planning to educate consumers about the new standard? 

Mr. MATHENY. The first step that we need to do is to get FCC 

approval to use the new standard. And so Chairman Pai has established a target date of the end of the year to actually have that 

rulemaking out. 

We believe that once that is done, stations will begin to go on the 

air and they will begin to use their airwaves to talk about what 

they are doing and the benefits of NextGen TV. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. It sounds like it is a voluntary program. 

Mr. MATHENY. It is a voluntary program, yes. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Well, OK. 

Dr. Khartibi, in your written testimony you mentioned that the 

wireless industry is taking steps to improve geographical targeting. 

Can you explain how these improvements compare to the geographical targeting of the 3.0 standard? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Actually, it is more on the wireless emergency 

alert that what we are trying to do is we started as a county level 

and now we are going to a smaller cell sector level. So we have already improving to a much more granular level at the existing deployment of wireless emergency alert. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. It is pretty exciting. I just want to make sure 

it is affordable for my constituents. 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Thank you. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you, I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

OK. Now we have got Mr. Long, you are recognized. 

Mr. LONG. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

On May the 22nd of 2011, it was my oldest daughter’s birthday. 

And we had a birthday party. Next Monday will be another birthday for her on May 22. And at that birthday party, alarms went 

off in Springfield, Missouri, and there was word that there was a 

tornado right at the edge of town. And the reason they thought 

there was a tornado at the edge of town, because there had been 

one 70 miles away, and we were getting debris from that tornado 

70 miles away. In Springfield that hit Joplin, Missouri, on May 

22nd of 2011. That was my indoctrination into being a Congressman. 

I had been here 5 months at the time and went down there as 

soon as it was daylight the next day, and stayed on the ground 

next day, missed a whole week of votes here in Washington. It was 

the single deadliest tornado in U.S. history since modern recordVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:22 Feb 01, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-31 CHRIS
50 

keeping began in 1950. Over 160 people lost their lives. If I remember right there were 8,000 homes destroyed, 500 businesses destroyed. And unfortunately, this is not an unheard of story in our 

part of the country, in tornado ally. 

I retweeted a report of a tornado in Oklahoma last night. After 

event assessments by FEMA determined that improvements were 

needed to better communicate the risks of impending storms to the 

public, Mr. Matheny, what kind of increased emergency alerting capabilities could ATSC 3.0 provide if a similar catastrophe, and let’s 

hope it doesn’t, strikes such as the Joplin tornado? 

Mr. MATHENY. Thank you, Congressman Long. First, if I could, 

my son shares a birthday with your daughter. 

Mr. LONG. Oh, very good. 

Mr. MATHENY. And if I reflect back on my childhood, my father 

was a founding member of the rescue squad in a small town that 

I grew up in: Zebulon, North Carolina. And I remember vividly the 

loss of life suffered by a tornado that hit Zebulon when he was in 

that role. 

As it relates to what NextGen alerting can do, it really does come 

back to the demonstration that we showed earlier, the idea that we 

can wake up a device that is sleeping. We can provide more information. In the case of a tornado, it might be a map of exactly 

where the warning is taking place. We can target the alerts, very 

much like the technology that was being discussed from AC&C. 

We can use that same sort of technology so that we are not alerting an entire television market but we are alerting the people that 

are specifically impacted. And we can deliver them more actionable 

information that really let’s them know what is happening and 

what they need to do. 

And then, finally, we can extend that beyond just the home television set to a variety of different devices from the automobile to 

computers to tablets, et cetera, anything that might have a 

NextGen TV tuner in it. 

Mr. LONG. OK. Thank you. 

And, Dr. Khartibi, what wireless emergency alerts mean for my 

constituents, and can you discuss what changes have been made to 

the wireless emergency alerts since then to provide better information to alert recipients? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. And thank you, Congressman. 

I think the most important thing I want to mention is that this 

is the most ubiquitous device that we have. We all have a cell 

phone, at least one, sometimes two. And having the ability to receive imminent threat information on your cell phone is critical to 

the point that we want to make sure that that information is available to you in a timely fashion and that saves a lot of lives. 

But beyond that second part of your question, we are continuing 

to enhance more characters so that you can have a lot more information. It used to be that we only had 90 characters, now we have 

360 characters. We potentially are going to allow URL computers 

so you can surf, get more information, additional languages, getting 

a little bit better constraints. 

So we are enhancing as we get more demands, we understand 

the public safety requirements more. To improve the technology to 

make it more useful for the consumer. 

51 

Mr. LONG. All right. Thank you. 

And Madam Chair, I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

Ms. Eshoo for 5 minutes. 

Ms. ESHOO. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

First, I just want to make a couple of comments before I get to 

our witnesses with my questions. And I think that they are both 

topics that were raised by other members, but I would like to add 

my voice to it as well. 

And that is that for our subcommittee, this is a wonderful hearing in our subcommittee. Certainly, the future of emergency alerting is very important in our country for so many reasons. 

But this is the committee that has oversight responsibility of the 

FCC. The FCC has not been here since last July. That is a long 

time ago, and there is a lot happening at the FCC. 

Tomorrow, they will take up and begin the effort to unravel net 

neutrality. I believe that this subcommittee, and under your leadership, Madam Chairwoman, that we have a hearing, an oversight 

hearing, with the FCC. 

Both my colleagues, Congresswoman Matsui and our ranking 

member, Mr. Doyle, and myself have sent a letter to the chairman 

of the full committee and yourself to request that the subcommittee 

hold a hearing to examine the proposed acquisition of tribune 

media by Sinclair broadcasting. This is a $3.9 billion deal that 

would create the single largest television broadcast company in the 

country. And I think that, again, this important subcommittee 

should be able to review and be able to ask questions. 

So I want to underscore the importance of having that hearing 

as well. So let me get to my questions. 

Thank you to the witnesses not only for your testimony but for 

the work that you have done in this field. 

In 2015, hackers were able to successfully disable a French 

broadcast television station. The new broadcast standard could enable hackers to do much more than simply take a station off the 

air including giving them a pathway into consumers’ homes. 

So my question is, how prepared are all of the members of the 

industry, not just large station groups, to defend against potential 

cybersecurity threats that the next generation standard may bring? 

Mr. MATHENY. Thank you, Congresswoman Eshoo. 

Broadcasters take very seriously the cybersecurity issues. 

Ms. ESHOO. Well, everyone does. And I have got a minute 50, so 

I want to get to all three and ask another question. So if you could 

just be brief. Thank you. 

Mr. MATHENY. OK. So we have lots of educational programs that 

are taking place and operate hardened physical facilities already, 

and so we take it very seriously and are working hard to ensure 

that even with the NextGen standard, we maintain top cybersecurity. 

Mr. KHARTIBI. I would also agree on wireless emergency that cybersecurity is extremely important, and we have already started 

activities to ensure that it is a safe and secure process. Thank you. 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. I would echo Dr. Khartibi on the wireless 

side, Congresswoman. 

52 

Ms. ESHOO. I have heard some allege that the FCC’s net neutrality protections could cause emergency alerts to get stuck behind 

some other traffic on the internet during an emergency. I would assume that the exception for a specialized service would make sure 

that that doesn’t happen. 

So I would like to go to Mr. Gutman-McCabe. Have you ever 

heard of emergency alerts or any other types of emergency communications being hampered by the net neutrality protections? 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. I have not. I mean, I have studied emergency alerts for a long time and net neutrality for a long time, and 

I haven’t actually really focused on the intersection of the two, to 

be quite honest. 

Ms. ESHOO. But you know of none, is what you are saying? 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Correct. 

Ms. ESHOO. Broadcasters are going to have the ability to use devices such as GPS information to geotargeting emergency alerts. 

This raises important privacy questions that are new to the industry. 

What other types of information will broadcasters be capable of 

collecting from consumers, and what safeguards will broadcasters 

put into place to protect information that is collected by consumers? 

Mr. MATHENY. So we believe that the idea of using location can 

really help with alert fatigue and serves a real value to providing 

meaningful—— 

Ms. ESHOO. This is on the privacy side is what I am asking. 

Mr. MATHENY. Yes. And so from a privacy perspective, broadcasters would have no greater access to information than they already have through their Web sites or other online offerings. And 

so there is already well documented security measures in place. 

Ms. ESHOO. Thank you. 

And I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentlelady yields back. 

Let’s see. Mr. Collins, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. COLLINS. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I want to thank our witnesses. For the last couple of years, pirate radio has been top of mind when it comes to me. And we all 

know that our former chairman, Mr. Wheeler, showed no inclination whatsoever to deal with the issue. 

The good news is Ajit Pai does recognize the impact pirate radio 

can have. And I think today’s radio really highlights a major issue 

on the emergency alert system and the potential interference. And 

so I maybe would want some comments from you as we move forward and try to get these pirate radio stations off the air. 

But we have certainly had reports. A lot of this is coming out of 

New York City, that in northern New Jersey, there was trouble 

with a station on the EIS because of pirate radio interference coming in the New York City area. 

And so, the other issue we have noted is that if somebody is listening to pirate radio, they don’t broadcast EAS alerts. So somebody in that instance wouldn’t get them to begin with. As we move 

forward, and I know Ajit Pai is going to move forward to try to 

shut these pirate radios down, kind of new sheriff in town in that 

regard. 

53 

But if you could weigh in. And maybe I will start with Dr. 

Khartibi on industry’s concern with something like pirate radio 

interfering with public safety in the EIS, EAS alerts. 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Thank you, Congressman. I think the important 

part of wireless emergency alert is that it is a very secure system 

that is originated from authorities to wireless devices that are functioning on spectrum that are assigned to wireless carriers. 

So from that perspective we can decouple somewhat from pirate 

radio, because all the information is sent through a channel that 

is licensed by FCC to their carriers. 

And the information is coming from an authority that we understand as its originator. So from that perspective, the good news is 

at that wirelessly, what we are immune from potentially pirate radios. Thank you. 

Mr. COLLINS. Now, they are not using license spectrum, they are 

stealing spectrum. 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Yes. But they are operating as a different spectrum than your devices function. Obviously, they can jam and so 

forth, which they can provide but the spectrum they are using for 

FM, AM and so forth, they are not the same spectrum we are using 

for wireless devices. 

Mr. COLLINS. Yes. 

Mr. Gutman-McCabe, do you have any comments? 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Congressman, just at the macro level, I 

think collectively, we as a society have to work to ensure that there 

is not misinformation when it comes to the delivery of emergency 

alerts. 

I know on the FEMA side they work hard with wireless carriers 

to confirm that those originating alerts are actually qualified and 

authorized to do so. 

So I think the pirate radio example would fall into a category of 

potential misinformation alerts and, we have got to be aware and 

try to reduce or eliminate them. 

Mr. COLLINS. Yes. 

Mr. Matheny? 

Mr. MATHENY. So as we are very concerned about pirate radio, 

and we think that the examples that you cited are ones that are 

of vital concern, especially when you consider the daisy chain effect 

of the EAS system and the idea that a pirate radio station might 

be operating on a frequency that not only interferes with a station 

but it could be an originating station that then prevents downstream stations from receiving that alert. 

So we absolutely share that concern. I think I would add to that 

that more and more cell phones have FM chips activated in them. 

And so the idea that you are able to listen to FM radio on your 

cell phone and millions upon millions of people are doing that 

today already, that is it becomes a concern for that type of information getting to cell phones as well. 

Mr. COLLINS. Yes. I want to thank all the witnesses. 

And I yield back. 

Mr. JOHNSON [presiding]. I thank the gentleman for yielding 

back. 

I now yield 5 minutes to our distinguished colleague from California, Mrs. Walters. 

54 

Mrs. WALTERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would like to thank the subcommittee for holding this hearing 

and the witnesses for sharing their insights. 

Over the years, my district in California has experienced a number of weather-related disasters, including flooding, earthquakes, 

and wildfires. As recently as last month, an AMBER Alert for a 

missing 1-year-old girl was issued throughout the region including 

Orange County. In each instance the distribution and accuracy of 

emergency alerts are critical to ensuring the safety of all individuals. As technology evolves, so will the way we communicate emergency information. 

As a new member of the committee, I look forward to learning 

more about your issues and how we can work together to build 

upon the existing emergency alert system. 

It is safe to say that Californians are pretty much waiting for the 

next big earthquake to hit. Particularly in my district, which sits 

near a major fault line. Schools hold earthquake drills, companies 

host earthquake safety sessions, and my office has hosted earthquake preparedness seminars for my constituents. 

Along those lines, I understand, Dr. Khartibi, that you are doing 

some work on earthquake detection. Can you tell me a little bit 

about what you are working on as it relates to the earthquake 

early warning system? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Thank you, Congresswoman. Thank you for asking 

that question, because I live in San Diego, and very close to the 

water, so I want to make sure that we have a system in California 

to detect and warn people on earthquakes. 

So we are working very closely with California OES operation 

system as well as USGS and earthquake authorities to design a 

system that we can alert a consumer on earthquake, astronauts detected and we go through a lot of details. There is a way we can 

detect the earthquake before you can actually get the shaking so 

we can give advanced warning to the folks who are in the imminent danger to take action before the actual shaking gets to them. 

So as I said, this is very near and dear to my heart and we are 

working very closely, the industry as a whole, to implement a system to detect and alert consumers very similar to real but a lot 

more efficient and a lot faster on earthquake systems. 

Mrs. WALTERS. OK. Thank you. 

Mr. Matheny, can you talk a little bit about how NextGen broadcast alerts can provide more information to recipients? 

Mr. MATHENY. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman. 

So we think that with the demonstration that we showed earlier 

and the idea that we can not just present scrolling text or basic information, we are able to really provide actionable information and 

that could come in the form of maps. It could come in the form of 

evacuation routes. It could come in the form of video on demand, 

even. 

So if you are talking about a complex issue, the ability to have 

that video downloaded in the background and to play for the user 

and combine that with the targeting of information such that if you 

are in one part of the broadcast area and I am in another, we may 

get different advice based on our exact situation. So there are a lot 

of capabilities that NextGen alerting will offer. 

55 

And in particular, I put that in the context of, again, being able 

to wake up a device, so to get someone’s attention, whether or not 

their device is turned on or not. 

Mrs. WALTERS. Thank you. 

And I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I thank the gentlelady for yielding back. 

I now recognize Mr. Costello for 5 minutes. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Matheny, you focus today on the advanced alerting capabilities of NextGen TV broadcast and the standard for it. If I understand correctly, broadcasters have to first ask the FCC for permission to innovate on their standard and achieve any of these benefits. Where is that issue at the FCC, and who else is supporting 

the Next Generation TV standard? 

And then, finally, can you clarify whether broadcasters are asking for any additional spectrum, funds, mandates, or relief from 

any mandates? 

Mr. MATHENY. Thank you, Congressman. 

We, along with the Consumer Technology Association, the association for public television stations, as well as the AWARN alliance filed a petition. There is a notice of proposed rulemaking out 

now. 

Chairman Pai has targeted the end of the year for having rules 

to enable broadcasters to begin to use the next generation standard. So we are hopeful that that timeline can hold and going into 

next year we will be able to have stations doing deployment. 

As it relates to further asks, our ask is one that is voluntary and 

does not require any mandates or additional spectrum or new 

funds. So we are taking a voluntary approach to this and, again, 

hope that deployment can begin next year. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Khartibi, in your testimony you touched on 

the recommendations from the CSRIC working group on the WEA 

security in terms of end-to-end security. 

Can you further describe current vulnerabilities and recommendations to mitigate them, the risk of malicious code within 

the supply chain ancillary questions? What about outside actors 

originating false WEA alerts or blocking real WEA alerts. And 

would developing more precise jurisdictional alerts help contain 

those cybersecurity concerns, or might they, by contrast, make it 

even a worse situation or accelerate it from spreading to neighboring jurisdictions. 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Thank you, Congressman. It is a very good question. 

So during the CSRIC V discussion that we had on cybersecurity, 

we looked at potential security issues end to end, from alert originators all the way to the carriers all the way to the users, and you 

provided a couple of excellent examples of where security issues 

could come up. 

What we are doing at the industry, we are working very closely 

with FEMA and DHS to address those security issues and make 

sure that we have a very secure end-to-end system. 

And as you mentioned, one of the points that we are trying to 

make sure we address is that the alert originators are authorized 

alert originators. Because we have seen through social media and 

56 

so forth, people can take advantage of sending some false alerts to 

actually cause more damage. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Right. 

Mr. KHARTIBI. So we are addressing that to make sure that alert 

originators for real is a secured alert originators. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Right, we will have to follow up on that in terms 

of—I am sorry. Go ahead, please. 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. I was just going to say, Congressman, the 

latter part of your question involved the geotargeting more granular alerts. And as I said earlier, we are finding that public safety 

is not using the capability because they can’t constrain or confine 

the alert to their jurisdiction. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Right. 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. And we have had many, many cities, and 

we have had Seattle said they have 18 microclimates, so they can’t 

send alerts, so they don’t use it. Harris County, Texas, has said, 

we haven’t used it, because even though we have had five presidential declarations of emergency, because we can’t confine it. 

So I do think you have to look at that issue with a balance and 

say the greater the granularity the more likely it actually gets 

used. That may open the door for some bad actors, but FEMA, I 

think, has a very robust process for making sure that doesn’t occur. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Thank you, gentlemen. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I thank the gentleman for yielding back. 

I am going to yield my time for a few questions. 

Dr. Khartibi, one of the things you mentioned in your testimony 

is enhancing end-to-end security. Could you describe that work and 

what it is aimed to address? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Yes. Thank you for the question. 

So part of the CSRIC V work that we did, we looked at all the 

end-to-end security, potential security issues that could be introduced. We haven’t seen any of those, but we went on and said, OK. 

What if? And how can we mitigate those security issues? 

So we created a report that said, what are the potential issues 

and how can it be mitigated, and industry now, taking a lead to 

make sure those security issues would not happen. 

So we are doing the best we can. And cybersecurity, you can 

never be 100 percent, but we are doing all we can to make sure 

that wireless emergency alert is from a very secured authority and 

gets to the consumer in a secure way. We have a huge report on 

that. And, as I said, the industries continue to work on that. Thank 

you. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you. I also notice that in your testimony 

that the FCC’s CSRIC working group did reports on social media 

and complementary alerting methods. Could you discuss concerns 

regarding trustworthiness and security with regard to social media 

as an alerting tool? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Yes. I think you pointed exactly the issue with social media. 

So social media can be helpful and at the same time it can be 

misused. So we had a very interesting discussion during CSRIC V 

on how potentially even the public safety can take advantage of information that is going on. For example, in the San Bernardino 

57 

shooting, there was a lot of information going on on social media 

that the public safety could use. 

At the same time, bad people can take advantage of the social 

media and spread bad information and cause even more damage. 

So we need to understand how to help take advantage of social 

media but not to the point that actually social media is not authority like wireless emergency alert, so that is the balance that we are 

trying to find. 

Mr. JOHNSON. OK, thank you. 

Mr. Gutman-McCabe, anything to add to that? 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Yes, Congressman. I heard a great quote 

with regard to the intersection of social media and emergency 

alerting, and Dr. Khartibi, I think, really hit at it. But the quote 

is, ‘‘With the use of social media when it comes to emergency situation, there is a potential for viral misinformation.’’ And I think that 

is a threshold concern that I and others who have worked on this 

issue have. 

Dr. Khartibi, I think, hit on it well, and he said it can provide 

an additional alternative or an add-on benefit. But the primary has 

to be, I believe, the EAS system that Mr. Matheny and NAB’s 

members provide as well as the wireless emergency alert that 

many of us have worked on. I think that has to be the primary, 

because it is authorized, it is confirmed. 

FEMA ensures that the person who originates the alert is actually allowed to—and I think that is a process that ensures that we 

get correct information, not viral misinformation. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Sure. 

Mr. Matheny? 

Mr. MATHENY. So I would say that trust is the key issue, and 

that is something that, as the study that was released this morning 

shows that broadcasters remain the most trusted source for information by a 4X margin. So I think turning to broadcasters to provide that trusted information about what is taking place is key, 

and broadcasters are providing that not just over the air with the 

free over-the-air signals but also on numerous platforms including 

social media. 

Mr. JOHNSON. OK. All right. Thank you. 

Mr. Khartibi, continuing with you, then, advancements in wireless emergency alerting sound promising, but we have also heard 

today the limitations of wireless communication, like network congestion in times of emergency. 

How is wireless industry working to overcome these limitations? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

So what we are doing right now is as we are evolving to 5G, we 

are trying to find out what other potential issues we can improve 

the system to make sure that 5G does not inherit all the issues 

that we had in 4G. 

So we are continuously thinking about what are the paths we 

can get so that wireless emergency alert which can save people and 

potentially disaster areas. That has no issues with congestion. 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Yes. And I would just add, Congressman, 

the alert itself goes over a different element of the wireless network, not the same network that you and I would use either for 

broadband access or for texting or for voice. 

58 

It is a cell broadcast, so it is a different component of the network that doesn’t have the issues of congestion. Those issues may 

happen after an event, but not with regard to the WEA service. 

Mr. JOHNSON. OK. And I thank you. 

My time has expired. I now yield 5 minutes to Mr. Guthrie from 

Kentucky. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Thank you very much. I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman, for yielding. I appreciate everybody being here. 

There was a healthcare subcommittee for the same committee 

going on, so I have been back and forth. So I think you just started 

talking about this. 

But, Dr. Khartibi, can you walk us through how a WEA alert is 

broadcast by a service provider? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Yes, I would be happy to do so. 

So as my colleague, Mr. Gutman-McCabe mentioned, we have a 

separate channel that we can broadcast the information. And the 

best part about it is that when it is broadcast to a particular cell 

site, all the devices, regardless of where their home location is, 

would get that. 

So, for example, I just arrived from San Diego last night. If there 

is a chemical spill here, all our devices would get that alert including mine. So there is no subscription needed. It just broadcasts to 

the specific cell sites that would have that information and all the 

devices would receive it. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. OK. And to Dr. Khartibi again, or Mr. GutmanMcCabe, one of the arguments for ATSC 3.0 is that if the technology incorporated into mobile devices they could be awakened in 

times of emergency. And I think one earlier might have mentioned 

this too when I was in earlier, so that alerts can be delivered. 

Do you see this as currently feasible, or is there any risk that 

this capability could drain battery power during a time when a 

commercial power outage is already compromising strength? 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Congressman, it is certainly something 

that we talked about when we put the committee together is awakening the device, and I think we called it a zombie device. The reality is the overwhelming majority of Americans for better or for 

worse don’t turn off their devices. And so we did study it at the 

time, somewhat robustly as we also studied incorporating a broadcast chip and satellite chip and FM chip, and we looked at those 

different capabilities and settled on the cell broadcast service as 

the right capability to deliver alerts on the mobile wireless platform. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. OK. And my final question for you, again, Mr. 

Gutman-McCabe, anybody can answer this, is what kind of impact 

were the advances that you discussed to have on the consumer devices? Do you anticipate it would increase the size or cost of a 

handset? 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Congressman, no. What we are looking at 

is simply a software upgrade. AT&T said in December that it could 

use existing APIs and capabilities in the device. So what we are 

trying to do is integrate software that would allow the intelligence 

in the handset to become part of WEA. 

And to address, actually, a number of the significant upgrades 

that Mr. Matheny has discussed, including the ability to geotarget, 

59 

including the ability to deliver rich content, including the ability to 

personalize the alert. 

So all of these things are available in—and are part of the capabilities of the device, to be quite honest. Linking that to WEA is 

what is under consideration at the FM PRM at the FCC, and we 

think that is the next iteration, the next stage. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. OK. Thank you very much. I appreciate your answers, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I thank the gentleman for yielding back. 

Now yield to Mr. Olson from Texas for 5 minutes. 

Mr. OLSON. I thank the chairman. 

Welcome to our witnesses. Mr. Gutman-McCabe, you and I are 

right there. You mentioned Harris County. Harris County is about 

20 percent of my district; Texas, 22. 

Is on track. It is exploding with growth. We think we will have 

1 million people by 2020, that is 250,000 over a normal congressional district. It is the most ethically diverse district in America. 

It is very geographically diverse. We have 20-story buildings, suburbs, cotton farms. Our big emergencies are typically weather. 

We have a saying in Texas: If you don’t like the weather, just 

wait 15 minutes; it will change. And that change will be a hurricane, a tornado, a drought, a flood, hail, earthquakes. 

But our office of emergency management back there have told me 

and the FCC that geotargeting alerts is the most important thing 

to the future of wireless emergency alerts since geotargeting can 

summon a car or order pizza like my son does through my phone 

or my other phone, and that could arrive at my door. 

It seems like my public safety people back home in Harris County should be able to use location capabilities and our devices to target alerts mostly in smaller areas. And since these capabilities are 

already in most devices like both of these, will that be allowed, will 

that be in order, will that capability be in order with our wireless 

communication alert service? What are the challenges going forward? What is going to happen? What are the challenges? 

And feel free to talk. It is not just for Mr. Gutman-McCabe. 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. So first of all, your Francisco Sanchez is 

your person that works on this issue in Harris County. And he is 

fantastic. He has actually worked with Dr. Khartibi on the CSRIC 

working group, and he is a great public servant. 

I have said throughout the hearing, I think getting that ability 

to geotarget will unleash a world of benefits to this service. And I 

do believe the capabilities are there, and I do know that Dr. 

Khartibi and the wireless industry are working on it, the issue is 

going to be, obviously, timing. 

It was a big deal when AT&T stepped out and said these capabilities exist in the device, that they are there, and that the industry can take advantage of those capabilities to manufacture this 

upgrade and this capability. 

Obviously, the issue is going to be when, but I know the industry 

is working on it. 

Mr. OLSON. Dr. Khartibi, you have been drawn in this conversation. You care to add something to it? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. First, I would like to also echo the fact that I had 

the pleasure to work with Mr. Sanchez as part of CSRIC V. We 

60 

were the coleads on it, and it was a real pleasure working with 

him. 

And I would like to also—and as Mr. Gutman-McCabe mentioned 

that industry is working on providing better location services. We 

went from a county level to cell site level and we have thoughts 

about, for example, device base on how to potentially improve it 

even further. So this is definitely industry is taking a lead on it, 

and we are working very closely with FEMA and DHS to improve 

that. Thank you. 

Mr. OLSON. Thank you. You want anything there, Mr. Matheny, 

or are you fine? 

Mr. MATHENY. No. I would just say that the same benefits of 

geolocation apply to next generation television, and the idea that 

we can provide target alerts that would help with alert fatigue but 

also would provide more actionable information to the affected individuals. 

Mr. OLSON. Thank you, gentlemen. 

One message from Mr. Sanchez, he wants to remind all of you 

that the Houston Astros has the best record in pro baseball today. 

I yield back. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I thank the gentleman for yielding back. 

Mr. Bilirakis from Florida, recognized now for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it very 

much. 

As a district on the Gulf Coast, a significant portion of my constituents live on or near the water, they live near the water or on 

the water, and fortunately, they experience major flooding. Currently, evacuation routes are limited to only a few east/west roads 

and bridges. Unfortunately, about a 40 mile-per-hour wind. The 

bridges close to the public, which further restricts emergency 

routes. So it is a big, big problem in our area. 

Due to this, I am very interested in the 2016 FCC’s examination 

of new event codes for storm surge warnings and extreme wind 

warnings. 

Dr. Khartibi, what progress has industry made to support these 

codes? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Thank you, Congressman, for that question. 

We have done a lot of progress on that. As a matter of fact, right 

now, we are almost completing the standard. When I say standards, Mr. Gutman-McCabe work for, we have done prescription so 

that all manufacturers start implementing it. So we have completed the standards, and that means that now we can make sure 

that all devices and all handsets would have that capability shortly 

and the networks as well. 

So we are very much on our way to including those event codes 

in our devices and in our network. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you very much. 

In addition to flooding, just last week my district experienced 

wildfires. Throughout the ordeal, Pasco County government shared 

information on social media about road closures, smoke conditions, 

and also livestreamed a press conference online, our firefighters did 

an outstanding job as they always do, to put out these fires. So 

saved many lives. We were so grateful to them. 

61 

Again, Dr. Khartibi, could you describe the integration or coordination of wireless emergency alert system messages and the everchanging information on the ground being shared by the local governments on, again, the online community? 

Mr. KHARTIBI. Yes, sir. That is an excellent question. 

It is designed so that we can potentially have input from both 

local, state, and Federal input. And we receive some statistic that 

there has been 850 alert originators so far and over 30,000 alerts 

sent. So we allow, definitely, local authorities definitely have access 

to provide timely information to consumers in scenarios we described. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. OK. 

One last question. Due to my area’s limited evacuation routes, 

and we are working on fixing that, but I am intrigued by the development of more accurate geotargeting of emergency areas. By mitigating alert spillover outside the target zone, we can prevent unnecessary road congestion. So the question is for Mr. GutmanMcCabe. 

You discussed the ability to geofence any shaped emergency zone 

and better target populations. Is it feasible in the near future to 

send two separate messages to two distinct groups within a specific 

tower coverage area? Again, how granular can we go? 

Mr. GUTMAN-MCCABE. Certainly, Congressman. 

So the answer is yes, it will be, this ability to geotarget and get 

more granular is put into the device. Think of it as two people on 

the same street can order Uber and get two different Ubers to the 

same area, or I can order an Uber in my house and walk across 

the street and order a second one and get both of them. It is the 

only limitation is the ability of the device to identify its location, 

and the devices are getting more and more accurate. 

So the public safety, and the FCC is proceeding, has identified 

exactly that type of scenario that you have just highlighted, which 

is we want the west side of this street to move west, and we want 

the east side of this street to move east, and that is the way we 

avoid congestion. 

And so evacuation routes or, you know, splitting an order, shelter 

in place to this block, evacuate, you know, to the next block. And 

you can imagine that type of situation applying itself in all sorts 

of emergency scenarios; shootings, things like that. 

That horrific shooting in Orlando is a perfect example. Public 

safety would like to target an alert right to that specific nightclub 

and say to that nightclub, you know, there is a shooter in the 

building. We are coming in, you know, duck. And then outside that 

building, it would be, do not go near the building. And so in that 

situation, you would have a donut hole in a donut sort of message. 

That capability is on the horizon. 

I know the industry is working on it, and we believe, but more 

importantly, public safety believes it will be informational. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Very good. Exciting stuff. Thank you. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you. The time has expired. And now seeing 

there are no further members wishing to ask questions for the 

panel, I thank all of our witnesses for being here today. 

62 

Pursuant to committee rules, I remind members that they have 

10 business days to submit additional questions for the record. And 

I ask that witnesses submit their responses within 10 business 

days upon receipt of these questions. 

Seeing no further business before the subcommittee today, without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:51 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] 

63 


26386.026
64 


26386.027
65 


26386.028
66 

Æ 


26386.029