EAS Rules Clarification


The EAT is redundant to the EAN's EOM. Propose to change part 11 to remove this alert code from EAS system.


Submitted by

Stage: Active

Feedback Score

16 votes

Idea Details

Vote Activity (latest 20 votes)

  1. Upvoted
  2. Downvoted
  3. Upvoted
  4. Upvoted
  5. Upvoted
  6. Upvoted
  7. Upvoted
  8. Upvoted
  9. Upvoted
  10. Upvoted
  11. Downvoted
  12. Upvoted
  13. Upvoted
  14. Downvoted
  15. Upvoted
  16. Upvoted
  17. Upvoted
  18. Upvoted
  19. Upvoted
  20. Upvoted
(latest 20 votes)

Similar Ideas [ 4 ]


  1. Comment
    Ed Czarnecki

    Agree. §11.13(b) should be deleted entirely. However, if for some reason the EAT is retained, the definition contained under §11.13(b) absolutely must be amended. As

    currently stated, the working under §11.13(b) confuses an EAT message with the End of Message (EOM) signal terminating an EAN message.

  2. Comment
    Community Member

    I disagree. As I understand it the EAT and the EOM serve two different purposes.

    EOM simply releases your EAS box at the end of a specific message whether it be from NOAA, a local or state law enforcement agency or the president. Every message must end with an EOM.

    During the course of a national emergency initiated by an EAN there might be multiple transmissions from Federal government officials, each one ending with an EOM. Between such transmissions in such a national state of emergency there would be time for local and state officials to provide emergency information.

    EAT is a code that releases the station to return to normal programming after a series of emergency messages has been transmitted, after a national emergency has passed. And the EAT message would also be ended with an EOM.

    Without the EAT there is no documentable evidence that the station has permission to resume its normal broadcast schedule.

    I do agree that the functions of EAN and EAT need to be clarified in the code.

  3. Comment
    Community Member ( Idea Submitter )

    "EAT is a code that releases the station to return to normal programming after a series of emergency messages has been transmitted"

    So if I understand it correctly, first EAN comes and goes. Station needs to sit by and wait and wait for ... oh the second EAN comes and goes. Station continues to wait (in silence?)... third, forth, etc EAN come and go. That's the thorey, correct?

    What's the definintion of "normal programming" would a station that offers news between EAN messages be in the wrong?

    The EAN provides the needed info from the Pres, PN's will break in for that alert, but why do PN's need to be told when they can stop. The fact that the EAN works is enough.

    Heck, if just one EAN alert were broadcast, I think the EAT would the last thing a NP would be worrying about.

    EAT get rid of it..just one more confusing code.

Add your comment