CANADIAN ALERTING POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

RICHARD MOREAU, CHIEF - INTEROPERABILITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE DOUG ALLPORT, SENIOR ADVISOR, ACTING GENERAL MANAGER – MASASMAY 1, 2012

PRESENTATIONCanadian policy considerations

• Public alerting

• Alerting between officials

SHARED GOVERNANCE FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL/TERRITORIAL

• Public alerting• CAP – Canadian

Profile (CAP-CP)• Multi-Agency

Situational Awareness System

• Others

LANGUAGE POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

PROXIMITY TO THE UNITED STATES

NATIONAL (PUBLIC) ALERT AGGREGATION AND DISSEMINATION SYSTEM (NAADS)• Privately owned• Result of regulatory decision/considerations• Public/private governance council

• Pelmorex (The Weather Network/MétéoMedia)• Federal, provincial and territorial alerting authorities• Broadcasters• CAPAN

PUBLIC ALERTING POLICY CONSIDERATIONSBroadcast Intrusive List

• Table of event, urgency, severity and certainty combinations

• Owned by federal, provincial and territorial groupCommon Look and Feel

• Broadcast crawler length, tone, colour, audio length, quality, content

• Led by province, with public and private participantsIssuer Rights

• One of 140 event types, one or more levels of severity, for a single town, township, city, etc.

• Managed by provinces using NAADS interface

CANADA-U.S. POLICY TO BE DEVELOPED

Beyond the Border Action Plan

Page 25: “The second working Group will focus on cross-border interoperability as a means of harmonizing cross-border emergency communications efforts. It will pursue activities that promote the harmonization of the Canadian Multi-Agency Situational Awareness System with the United States Integrated Public Alert and Warning System to enable sharing of alert, warning, and incident information to improve response coordination during binational disasters.”

MULTI-AGENCY SITUATIONAL AWARENESS SYSTEM INFORMATION EXCHANGE

WHAT IS AN ENTRY?• Less than an alert• Reduces over-alerting• Provides an alternative for those who are not

allowed to issue an alert• Use case:

• Issue CAP alert that shelters are open• Identify shelter locations with an Entry, and update

them regularly without issuing alert updates, hourly per location, for example.

SCOPE POLICY

SENSITIVITY

Restricted access Hub:“the break-out room”

MASAS-XCommon Hub

Moving from restricting what we share to restricting what we don’t!

Road closures,

severe weather, check points,

area of operation, command posts, plumes,evacuation zone, shelter

water stations, shelter status, staging area, Supply depot, live cameras, media events, sensors,

sitreps, earthquakes, space weather, ...

AUTHENTICATION CONSIDERATIONS1. We authenticate agencies, they manage

authority.1. We will give them the opportunity to configure user

accounts for their agency. Ex: “Read Only”, “Training Mode Only”.

2. NGO’s must be “endorsed” by a public agency to gain access.

FUNDING• Currently operates a s a federally funded “Pilot”

• Transition to a cost-shared model is currently under study

OWNERSHIP POLICY CONSIDERATIONS• Alternatives have been studied and are now

under review• May be owned and managed by a co-operative

• Every user is a member subject to common “evergreen” bylaws

• “Membership” agreement instead of “Participation” or “Service” agreements

MORE DETAILS IN PRESENTATION LATER, AND DEMONSTRATION THURSDAY