Emergency Alerting—False Alarm in Hawaii
January 17, 2018
Emergency Alerting—False Alarm in Hawaii
Background
Timeline
On Saturday, January 13, 2018, at 8:07 a.m., an emergency
HI-EMA shared a timeline of events at a press conference
alert was issued by Hawaii’s Emergency Management
held on January 13, 2018:
Agency (HI-EMA) warning residents and visitors in Hawaii
of an incoming ballistic missile. The message was sent by
8:07 a.m.—The initial alert was sent.
HI-EMA through the state’s emergency alert system which
distributed it to radio and television stations and to
8:10—HI-EMA officials received the alert on their own cell
thousands of cell phone users in Hawaii. Widespread fear
phones and started the cancellation process.
and panic was reported.
8:13—Hawaii’s State Warning Point (the state’s central
communication center) initiated the process to stop
transmitting the message.
8:20—HI-EMA posted the cancellation message
to Facebook and Twitter.
8:24—Governor Ige retweeted the cancellation message.
8:30—Governor Ige posted the cancellation on Facebook.
8:45—HI-EMA issued a second alert over the emergency
alert system, announcing the false alarm.
Within minutes, HI-EMA officials received the alert on
The Nation’s Alerting System
their own cell phones and realized the message was sent in
In 2006, President George W. Bush issued Executive Order
error. HI-EMA reported that a team member issued an
(E.O.) 13407 establishing a policy for national alerts and
actual alert instead of a test alert during a required test of
warnings. The E.O. provides the President with a means to
the system at a shift change. HI-EMA then had difficulty
communicate with citizens during emergencies, and
issuing a correction/retraction message.
recognizes the role of state, local, tribal, and territorial
entities in emergency response.
When they received the alert, the Hawaii National Guard
reportedly contacted U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM)
The E.O. requires the Department of Homeland Security
which confirmed there had been no missile launch.
(DHS) to lead the effort, in coordination with federal, state,
Representative Tulsi Gabbard contacted the Hawaii
local, tribal, territorial, and private sector partners – to
National Guard, confirmed there was no threat, and released
integrate and modernize the nation’s public alert and
a “FALSE ALARM” message on Twitter at 8:19 a.m.
warning systems. These systems include:
Emergency Alert System (EAS);
National Warning System (NAWAS);
Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA); and
NOAA Weather Radio All Hazards.
HI-EMA posted a “FALSE ALARM” message on
The network is designed to integrate the nation’s warning
Facebook and Twitter at 8:20 a.m., but the official
systems into one system, called the Integrated Public Alert
correction from HI-EMA through the state’s emergency
and Warning System (IPAWS). IPAWS is managed and
alerting system was not released until 8:45 a.m.—38
funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
minutes after the initial alert.
(FEMA), a component of DHS. IPAWS allows alerts to be
originated by federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial
Residents and elected officials criticized the length of time
officials, and then sent through the IPAWS system which
HI-EMA took to issue the correction.
disseminates the message to the public using multiple
alerting systems (e.g., EAS sends the alert to television and
radio, WEA sends the alert to cell phones).
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Emergency Alerting—False Alarm in Hawaii
The benefit of IPAWS is that it allows authorized state and
Incident in Hawaii—After Alert Was
local officials to send one message to many channels at the
Sent
same time, reducing the time needed to send messages,
Immediately after the alert was sent, HI-EMA officials
reducing the possibility of errors in message content and
spent time researching how to retract the message. HI-EMA
delivery, and ensuring timely delivery to citizens who may
officials asked FEMA for clarification about whether they
rely on different devices to receive emergency alerts.
could use IPAWS to rescind an alert. FEMA stated that HI-
EMA did not need approval to retract the alert, that it had
As shown in this incident, officials may leverage multiple
authority to cancel or retract any time.
means of communication (e.g., social media) to send
messages to citizens. This is not part of the national alerting
In a press conference several hours later, HI-EMA
system. The resulting benefits are that these messages are
confirmed that the release of the “FALSE ALARM” was
fast and easy to send; the risks are that they may not be
delayed while they consulted FEMA on the retraction
accurate or coordinated with emergency management staff.
policy and crafted the cancellation message. HI-EMA also
confirmed that their alerting software allows for single-
FCC Role
activation and verification of alerts. HI-EMA has since
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) plays an
changed that protocol to require dual verification.
important role in emergency alerts. In conjunction with
FEMA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Some congressional policymakers have called for hearings
Administration’s (NOAA) National Weather Service
on the incident, citing a need to review federal-state-local
(NWS), the FCC implements the national Emergency Alert
communications and response protocols during national
System (EAS). The EAS is a national public warning
security incidents, and requesting preparedness assistance.
system that requires broadcasters (e.g., television, cable,
The state legislature is also conducting hearings.
satellite) to provide communications capabilities to (1) the
President to address the American public during a national
Issues for Congress
emergency, and (2) state and local governments to provide
Congressional hearings on the incident are planned. Issues
important emergency information to specific areas.
for consideration may include:
The FCC’s role includes prescribing rules that establish
How are states prepared for disasters? Congress may
technical standards for the EAS, procedures for
hold hearings on the incident to learn about the issues
broadcasters to follow, and testing protocols.
Hawaii faced (e.g., communications, transportation,
public health and safety); what FEMA has done and is
Further, the FCC is responsible for implementing the
doing to help states prepare for disaster; how well states
provisions in the Warning, Alert, and Response Network
feel they are prepared for disasters; and what FEMA can
(WARN) Act (P.L. 109-347), which allowed commercial
do to strengthen preparedness in all states.
mobile service (CMS) providers to transmit the alerts to cell
phones, if they chose. In 2016, the FCC adopted rules to
Are improvements to the national alert system needed?
improve Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA), including
Congress may wish to request that FEMA/IPAWS
making alert messages longer (more characters), supporting
review the software endorsed for use with IPAWS to
URL links to provide additional information to citizens, and
ensure any features that could contribute to false alerts
supporting Spanish-language alerts.
are corrected; review training modules to ensure
cancellation procedures are included; provide additional
Alerting Authorities
training to states on cancellation protocols; and share
A federal, state, territorial, tribal, or local agency that has
lessons learned from Hawaii with other IPAWS users.
been granted authority by its government to alert the public
in emergency situations can sign up for IPAWS. That
How may policymakers improve alert systems? The
agency is known as an “Alerting Authority.”
system successfully delivered the alert, but provided
limited information about what to do in response. There
IPAWS is accessed through special software that must meet
may be a need for the FCC, FEMA/IPAWS, and state
IPAWS system requirements. Alerting Authorities can
emergency managers to coordinate to improve alerts and
select software from a list of private sector developers who
the delivery of follow-on instructions. The FCC is
have successfully tested that software in an IPAWS Open
investigating the incident in Hawaii. Congress may wish
Platform for Emergency Network (IPAWS-OPEN) test
to ask the FCC to share its findings, to determine how
environment or they can select their own software that must
Congress may assist in improving alerts.
then be tested in the IPAWS-OPEN test environment.
How may policymakers improve coordination during
While access to IPAWS is free, and there is no cost to
response? Congress may review the findings from any
sending messages, Alerting Authorities must purchase the
after-action reports or investigations of this incident to
IPAWS-compatible software to access the system.
address any issues with communications, coordination,
and response among federal, state, and local officials.
Jill C. Gallagher, Analyst in Telecommunications Policy
IF10816
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Emergency Alerting—False Alarm in Hawaii
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10816 · VERSION 3 · NEW