Chattanooga Times Free Press

False alarms show weaknesses in U.S. alert system

- BY MICHAEL RUBINKAM

Weather junkie John Grosso knew it was highly unlikely a monster wave was barreling toward the Connecticu­t coast. Still, when a tsunami warning appeared out of the blue on his phone Tuesday, he felt a twinge of fear. His coworkers, who got the same alert, asked whether they should evacuate.

It turned out to be a false alarm, a computer glitch. The damage? An erosion of trust.

“Now I have to check every single time, God forbid, there’s a tornado warning, a tsunami alert, pick your poison,” said Grosso, 25, a social media manager from Stamford. “I have to look at it and go, ‘Is it a test? Was it sent in error?’ And I could be wasting precious time in case it was real.”

Last month’s bogus ballistic missile warning in Hawaii and last week’s tsunami snafu have highlighte­d trouble spots and prompted calls for change in the nation’s increasing­ly complex system for alerting Americans about dangerous weather, active shooters, kidnapped children, plant explosions and other emergencie­s.

Both incidents have prompted calls for reform, including better training for emergency workers in charge of sending alerts.

More than 1,000 federal, state and local government agencies have the ability to issue emergency alerts through an array of federally managed communicat­ions networks. It is a patchwork system that usually works as intended but can wreak havoc when it doesn’t.

In the Senate, legislatio­n introduced last week in response to the false missile alert would establish standards for state and local agencies’ participat­ion in the national alert system, require federal certificat­ion of their incident management systems, and recommend steps for avoiding false alarms.

Additional­ly, the Federal Communicat­ions Commission has ordered wireless providers to do a better job of targeting emergency alerts to only those in the affected area, with a geographic “overreach” of no more than one-tenth of a mile.

Aside from the false alarms, emergency agencies have been criticized for sending alerts to too many people or too few. In Alaska, for instance, a tsunami warning triggered by an undersea earthquake in January reached residents of Anchorage even though the city wasn’t in danger. In Northern California wine country, where wildfires killed dozens of people in October, some residents complained authoritie­s failed to send an emergency alert to their phones.

“The emergency alerting system is really a whole collection of systems, and there are various places where it can break down,” said Dan Gonzales, a scientist at RAND Corp. who studies emergency alert systems. “With so many organizati­ons involved, it’s difficult to make it foolproof.”

The risk of too many false alarms, Gonzales said, is that “people will ignore warnings if they believe they’re not accurate or not relevant.”

Jeremy DaRos, of Portland, Maine, who lives near the water and got the erroneous tsunami alert, said he is concerned people won’t take seriously the emergency alerts they get in an actual crisis.

“People need to trust the alerts they’re pushing out,” he said. “This is important stuff, and to have two incidents in the span of a month is just unacceptab­le.”

 ?? THE ASSOCIATED PRESS ?? Jeremy DaRos shows the erroneous tsunami alert he received on his phone Feb. 6 in Portland, Maine.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Jeremy DaRos shows the erroneous tsunami alert he received on his phone Feb. 6 in Portland, Maine.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States