One reason for the 38-minute delay between sending a false missile alert to cellphones Saturday and sending a retraction was the mistaken belief among state emergency workers that they needed approval from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to correct the faulty alert.
Hawaii Emergency Management Agency (HI-EMA) spokesman Richard Rapoza said the agency consulted with FEMA on Saturday before sending the all-clear. That step, which FEMA has said wasn’t needed, is one factor in the lengthy delay. Another factor was that HI-EMA did not have a retraction script in its computer menu.
FEMA said Tuesday that HI-EMA possessed the authority to cancel or retract the false warning without intervention or approval from FEMA. This approvals process was established “upfront,” when HI-EMA applied in 2012 for access to the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System, the agency said.
HI-EMA Administrator Vern Miyagi took responsibility for missteps during a news conference following Gov. David Ige’s live address Monday.
“We believed that we needed to discuss with FEMA whether we could make those changes,” Miyagi said.
In reality, he admitted, “we did not need the FEMA authorization alert.”
As for the script, Miyagi said if the department had prepared it, there “would not have been a delay.”
The Honolulu Star-Advertiser has asked state and federal agencies to clarify why Hawaii emergency management was unclear about FEMA protocol. The newspaper also is seeking more details about the communication breakdown, such as when the state agency contacted FEMA and when FEMA responded. So far, those answers have not been made available.
Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen said Tuesday that she has asked FEMA to work with Hawaii to ensure that the state gets clarity on the proper protocol and procedures for issuing and retracting an alert.
“We provide the backbone of an alerting system which state and locals are able to tap into to reach their citizens. But the decision in this case to utilize that backbone and how it was utilized was the state’s decision,” said Nielsen, whose remarks were made to Hawaii’s U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono during a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on Capitol Hill.
Nielsen told Hirono that she was unaware Hawaii emergency management was unprepared prior to the incident.
“I’d like to work with you to ensure that we’re providing specific instructions on what to do upon an alert,” she said.
Hirono said, “Saturday’s false emergency alert about a ballistic missile threat to Hawaii induced fear and panic throughout the islands. The threat was false but the panic was real. People are upset and demanding answers, and so am I.”
U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz said he is gearing up to hold a hearing in Hawaii on the false alarm. On Tuesday, U.S. Reps. Colleen Hanabusa (D-urban Honolulu) and Tulsi Gabbard (D-suburban Oahu, neighbor islands) formally requested a congressional inquiry. Their letter, sent to the top-ranking members of the House Committee on Armed Services, asked for a hearing to explore whether distributing national security alerts should remain a state duty.
“When it comes to matters of national security, including whether a ballistic missile has been launched against the United States, one must question whether any state emergency management agency is best suited for that role,” the request stated.
Rapoza said HI-EMA should retain notification responsibility. The agency has implemented a new policy requiring two employees to send out alerts, he said. A retraction script has been written and added to the computer menu, he said, and testing of ballistic missile alerts has been suspended until officials determine what went wrong and get it fixed.
Miyagi has not been asked to resign. The HI-EMA employee who mistakenly sent the false alert has been “counseled” and reassigned to another job, which is removed from the alert process, Rapoza said.
