EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS AND PERSONS WITH
DISABILITIES: POLICY, PLANNING, AND WIRELESS TECHNOLOGICAL RESPONSES
Presenter #1
Helena Mitchell
CACP/Georgia Institute of Technology
Day Phone: 404.385.4640
Email: helena.mitchell@cacp.gatech.edu
People with disabilities are particularly vulnerable during natural and
manmade disasters. This paper addresses emergency communications and wireless
technologies? role in bridging critical gaps
INTRODUCTION
"In 2004, the American Red Cross
responded to almost 70,000 disasters, large and small...no state or territory
was left untouched."2 As illustrated and reported in the popular press
many of those injured occur among the more vulnerable populations. An
estimated 49.7 million men, women and children have a disability that to some
degree impacts their everyday activities.3 Further, approximately 35.0
million Americans (12.4 % of the total population) are over the age of 65
years4 and by 2030 the 65 and over population will double to 70 million or 20 %
of the total U.S. population.5 The magnitude of these vulnerable
populations is a critical consideration when conducting disaster planning and
emergency communications. Unfortunately, the fact that few emergency
personnel or accessible technologies specifically address or understand the
needs of persons with disabilities during stressful emergency events represents
a significant policy concern.
CHALLENGES OF EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS POLICY
The role of emergency communications and
telecommunications tools in ensuring full participation in society is reflected
in a variety of legislative, regulatory and policy instruments. The
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was created to provide a clear and
comprehensive mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals
with disabilities,6 and to ensure ?access to public services.?7 Congress
included within the Telecommunications Act of 1996 a provision to ensure
individuals with disabilities had access to emergency services.
In 2004, Executive Order 13347 required that
there be appropriate support and coordination of efforts at various levels of
the Federal government to ensure the safety and security of persons with
disabilities during natural and manmade emergency situations.8 The
Interagency Coordinating Council on Emergency Preparedness and Individuals with
Disabilities which was formed as a result of the executive order had clear
goals as stated by Daniel W. Sutherland, Department of Homeland Security’s
Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, ?This Council will ensure the
coordination of preparedness work being done across the country, maximize the
value of past efforts and stimulate new work to address the difficult
challenges that face this community.?9
In addition to Executive Branch activities, the regulatory branch of
government examined the effectiveness of emergency communications. In
field tests between 1991 and 1994, agencies that dealt with emergency
preparedness went through a series of rulemakings, holding hearings and focus
groups to examine the factors that would create a strong working emergency
communications system to replace EBS.10 Stakeholders such as the National
Association for the Deaf, Television for All, Telecommunications for the Deaf,
Self Help for Hard of Hearing People, and Gallaudet University, and industry? lead
by the Electronic Industry Association also participated.
As a result of combined efforts, a new Emergency Alert System (EAS) was
created by Report and Order in November 1994. EAS required provisions for
hearing and visually impaired persons? including text across all channel, audio
alerts, and the ability to turn-on specifically equipped radios and
televisions, cable systems were to provide video messages on all channels to
hearing impaired and deaf subscribers and audio and video interrupt on all
channels. There was no mandatory requirement for other technologies or
services to become a part of EAS.
EAS officials recognized that a challenge in creating sound emergency
communications policy was the role of state and local emergency communications
plans. 11 State Emergency Communications Committees (SECCs) and Local
Emergency Communications Committees (LECCs) were responsible for creating and
implementing the plans. The chairs for those committees verified that
having proper plans ensured emergency personnel were better equipped during an
emergency in how best to ensure safety of life and property.12 By
ensuring that plans included knowledge on how best to assist individuals with
disabilities during emergency evacuations an understanding of the accessibility
concerns of people with disabilities would contribute to reduced lose of
life.13
COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES TO ASSIST PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
Given the importance of emergency
communications, persons with disabilities have a right to receive alerts in the
most user friendly, applicable and commonly used modality of the individual.
An important approach to the development of inclusive emergency
communications systems takes into account the design and implementation of
appropriate user interfaces and a wide range of devices capable of receiving
emergency communications. Comments to the FCC? s NPRM regarding EAS, included
discussion on the benefits of wireless devices such as cell phones, and other
digital communications reaching the widest possible target audience by
increasing the diffusion of these devices to all users, especially those with
disabilities.14
Expanding wireless digital technologies15 such as DBS and DARS may be
crucial in reaching out to people with vision disabilities, for whom radio is
especially important. Likewise, transmissions of emergency message text
on the RBDS signal so that a person with a hearing impairment could see the
message on a screen. The deaf community has become significant adopters
of 2-way text pagers such as the Blackberry. Blind consumers can now
purchase cell phones that read SMS messages to them. Increased usage of
these devices16 by the general public and the hearing and visually impaired
also creates a viable avenue for sending emergency communications to these
sorts of technology tools. Broadcasting or multicasting of text messages
to wireless devices, reverse 911 calls, or other systems could be used to
notify users of wireless devices (including WiFi based devices), thus
increasing access to emergency information to persons with disabilities as well
as the general public. Final!
lly, the creation of voluntary industry standards, such as the Alternative
Interface Access Protocol has the potential to ease the burden of government
regulations such as Section 255 of the Telecom Act of 1996 and Section 508 of
the Rehabilitation Act, by providing access to electronic and information
technologies for people with disabilities.17
NOW WHAT: POLICY OPPORTUNITIES
Digital interoperable features and flexible architecture of wireless
technology can be adapted in multiple ways, not all of which can be predicted.
Thus the emergency communications community needs to maintain
flexibility. More than a decade ago, prototype warning systems were able
to reach everyone regardless of the communications mode or whether that device
was turned on or off18, the possibilities for using such devices today are even
more critical as the public increasingly utilizes computers, personal digital
assistants, cable, and car radios to receive information. Next
generation, low-cost wireless solutions has the potential to create a plethora
of devices that are accessible, user friendly and offer emergency
communications and services.19 The benefits of increased accessibility
and in many cases universal design to emergency communications devices, will
benefit both people with disabilities and those people without disabilities.
The public has a right to expect!
that policy makers and industry will work toward a common goal of providing
emergency communications that truly is effective and can assist in the timely
evacuation of all people in any emergency situation.
1 The Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Mobile Wireless
Technologies for Persons with Disabilities is sponsored by the National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) of the U.S.
Department of Education under grant number H133E010804. The opinions
contained in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect
those of the U.S. Department of Education or NIDRR.
2 http://www.redcross.org/pubs/dspubs/amdisasters2004.pdf "
3
4 Census 2000.
5 Day, J., Population Projections of the
6 42 U.S.C. Section 12101 (b) (1).
7 42 U.S.C. Section 12101 (a) (3).
8 Executive Order: Individuals with Disabilities in Emergency Preparedness,
signed by George W. Bush on July 22, 2004.
9 DHS, FEMA, USFA News in Review, Volume 2, No.5, June/July 2004, page 2
?DHS to Lead Interagency Coordinating Council on Emergency Preparedness and
Individuals with Disabilities.?
10 See Amendment of Part 73, Subpart G, of the Commission’s Rules Regarding
the Emergency Broadcast System, FO Docket 91-301/FO Docket 91-171, Report and
Oder and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Field Tests paragraphs 16-25
11 In the Matter of Review of the Emergency Alert System EB Docket No.
04-296 (Released August 12, 2004). See comments of the Wireless RERC
filed October 29, 2004.
12 See FCC website, Enforcement Bureau, EAS Rules and Regulations, and SECC
and LECC 1990? s EBS chair meetings.
13 See Wireless RERC comments at page 6.
14 See Wireless RERC comments at page 12.
15 EAS NPRM at ? 29.
16 169 million subscribers to wireless services in the US., CTIA
Semi-annual Wireless Industry Survey, June 2004.
17 Interview with Ed Price of the V2 Committee and project director of the
emerging wireless technology project of the Wireless RERC, August 2005.
18 The Consumer Electronics Association Public Alert Receiver and the NOAA
Weather Radio have automatic turn on and off features, consequently adding this
feature to new devices in the event of a serious emergency transmission would
only serve to save more lives. As noted earlier, the cost to manufacturer
the chip was negligible.
19 Proceedings of the State of
Go to previous article
Go to next article
Return to 2006 Table of Contents