Search

Telecom and Broadcasting - Staff Letter addressed to the Distribution List

Gatineau, 23 April 2026

Our Reference: 1011-NOC2025-0180

BY EMAIL

Distribution List

Subject: Request for Information: Improving the public alerting system

Dear recipients:

This letter sets out questions related to Telecom and Broadcasting Notice of Consultation CRTC 2025-180 (the Notice) in which the Commission sought comments on certain aspects of the National Public Alerting System (NPAS) including barriers to accessibility, the languages in which alerts can be distributed, issues affecting the availability nationwide, and possible measures to enhance system monitoring.

Commission staff has reviewed the record of the proceeding and determined that additional information is required to provide further inform the Commission. As per the Broadcasting Act, the Telecommunications Act and the CRTC Rules of Practice and Procedure, the Commission may require the submission of information as necessary.

Accordingly, staff requests that certain parties submit responses to this request for information (RFI). The specific questions are set out in the Appendix 1 to this letter. For ease of reference, Appendix 2 contains a distribution list identifying the parties to whom each question is directed, if not indicated directly in the question.

Parties are requested to respond only to the specific questions directed to them, as identified in the Appendices, by 7 May 2026. Parties may then submit comments on those responses by no later than 14 May 2026. All documents filed must be received, not merely sent, by the date provided.

Pursuant to section 39 of the Telecommunications Act and in Procedures for filing confidential information and requesting its disclosure in Commission proceedings, Broadcasting and Telecom Information Bulletin CRTC 2010-961, 23 December 2010, parties may designate certain information as confidential. Such designation must include a detailed rationale, including an explanation of the specific direct harm likely to result from the disclosure and why this outweighs the public interest.

Where confidential information is filed, an abridged version of the document omitting only the confidential information, or reasons must be given if an abridged version cannot be filed. Only the abridged version of the document will become part of the public record and will be posted on the CRTC website.

A copy of this letter and all related correspondence will be added to the public record of the Notice.

If you have any questions, please contact Thomas Forsey: (819) 997-4956 – Thomas.Forsey@crtc.gc.ca.

Sincerely,

Michael Crupi
Manager, Network Technology
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

Appendix 1: Questions

Questions related to supporting additional languages through the NPAS and the accessibility of the system

For Select Recipients (See Appendix 2)

  1. In light of the recent issuance of alerts by Nunavut Emergency Management in Indigenous languages namely in Inuinnaqtun, and Inuktitut and the fact that the system could support Cree and DeneFootnote 1, identified parties are requested to address the following, to the best of their knowledge:

    1. Identify what changes to the NPAS are required to enable the seamless creation, issuance, and distribution of alerts in Inuinnaqtun, and Inuktitut, Cree, Dene, or any other languages other than English or French.
    2. With respect to these changes, describe the work required, stakeholders involved, and estimated timeframes for implementation.
    3. If applicable, provide details of any barriers or obstacles of the existing system that prevent the inclusion of the above-mentioned languages.

    4. Please provide all answers within the context of, but not limited to, the following components/elements of the NPAS, as they apply to your role within the system (e.g. LMD, NAAD operator, EMO/issuer, encoder/decoder box vendor):

      1. The NAAD interface used by alerts issuers
      2. The NAAD system itself, including its text-to-speech (TTS) functionality
      3. The broadcast distribution chain, including encoder/decoder boxes
      4. The wireless public alerting (WPA) distribution chain, including networks and mobile handsets
      5. The character setsFootnote 2 supported within these components (i.e. wireless networks, customer handsets, encoder/decoder boxes, the NAAD)
      6. Encoders/decoders

For Select Recipients (See Appendix 2)

  1. Intervenors to the record have indicated that the Commission could direct industry committees to examine and report on the requirements to implement alerting in different languages. Moreover, other intervenors highlighted the need for a forum to address NPAS accessibility. In light of this:

    1. Identify whether an existing industry group or governance structure, such as the CRTC Interconnection Steering Committee (“CISC”) working group, SOREM, the Public Alerting Working Group (PAWG), or the NAAD System Governance Council, is best placed to address multilingual alerting and accessibility issues, as it pertains to NPAS.

    2. If not, provide your views on whether the CRTC should establish such a forum or working group to examine multilingual alerting and accessibility within the NPAS. If so, include the following in your answer:

      1. The appropriate membership
      2. The scope of work, including how recommendations would be documented and reported to the Commission for effective follow-up

  2. Some intervenors have highlighted that the NPAS could support ASL/LSQ alerting templates on the AlertReady websiteFootnote 3 with the objective of enhancing accessibility for Deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals.

    1. Identify the development required to implement this initiative
    2. What group and alerting partners/stakeholders within the existing NPAS structure are most appropriately positioned to accomplish this task

    3. If no appropriate forum currently exists, indicate whether the CRTC should establish such a forum or working group to examine to support the development of a repository of ASL/LSQ alerting templates. If so, include the following in your answer:

      1. The appropriate membership
      2. The scope of work, including proposed timelines and key milestones for such a working group

For Pelmorex

  1. Certain interveners expressed interest in having a repository of previously issued and active alerts. Given that the AlertReady website already provides information on alerting including statistics and test dates, you are requested to respond to the following:

    1. Indicate whether the AlertReady website could be expanded to include such repository, and if so, how this could be implemented by the NAAD operator.
    2. Identify the work required, stakeholders involved, and estimated timeframes for implementation.

Questions related to addressing gaps in public alerting coverage

For Rogers

  1. Staff notes that Rogers has recently implemented wireless public alerting (WPA) over satellite-to-mobile services. In light of this:

    1. Describe the technical implementation of WPA over satellite-to-mobile services, including how networks and infrastructure are utilized.
    2. Identify any technical barriers to the implementation or continued operation of WPA alerting over satellite-to-mobile services and how such barriers were addressed.
  2. Describe how geo-targeting is managed for satellite-to-mobile alerting. Indicate the level of geographic granularity achievable and whether it aligns with the defined targeted areas of most issued alerts.

For Select Recipients (See Appendix 2)

  1. Previously, the CRTC determinedFootnote 4 that alerting over satellite services was not practical due to “the inability to undertake precise geo-targeting due to the nature of satellite beams”. Recently, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) have statedFootnote 5 that the CRTC “could undertake the work necessary to ensure Supplemental Mobile Coverage by Satellite's ability to support the distribution of emergency alerts”. In addition, staff notes that in NTRE081 the joint Emergency Services Working Group (ESWG) and Network Working Group’s (“NTWG”) task force recommended that the use of Wi-Fi, satellite and apps to distribute alerts should not be mandated as the primary option for distribution. In this context, parties are requested to respond to the following:

    1. In light of Rogers’ implementation of WPA over satellite-to-mobile services, indicate whether the previously identified geo-targeting limitations remain applicable, with supporting rationale.
    2. Comment on the technical feasibility and regulatory appropriateness of ISED’s comments on SMCS's ability to support the distribution of emergency alerts, including any measures the Commission should consider.
    3. Indicate whether the Commission should direct the CISC NTWG to revisit the technical feasibility of WPA over satellite and establish an implementation plan and timeline.

For Pelmorex

  1. Some intervenors have stated that the NAAD no longer employs a backup connection pathway for LMDs via satellite.

    1. Confirm if this is accurate and the rationale for this approach.
    2. Indicate whether this affects the ability of certain last-mile distributors to access the NAAD and effectively deliver alerts
    3. Identify whether redundancy measures could be re-established or enhanced to support LMDs

Appendix 2 – Select Recipients

Question 1

Industry and Associations

Broadcasting and Media Organizations

Telecommunications Service Providers

Community and Indigenous Organizations

Public Authorities and Emergency Management

Other Participants

Questions 2 and 3

Industry and Associations

Broadcasting and Media Organizations

Telecommunications Service Providers

Community and Indigenous Organizations

Public Authorities and Emergency Management

Language and Cultural Organizations

Accessibility and Public Interest Organizations

Other Participants

Question 7

Telecommunications Service Providers and Industry

Satellite Service Providers

Date modified: