Canadian telecom companies have released more details about the tornado alerts sent in June during a storm in Manitoba. Last month, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) asked Pelmorex, the company that runs the national Alert Ready system, to answer questions about the alerts sent during the June 9 storm. In addition to Pelmorex, Rogers, Telus and Bell Mobility were also questioned. Responses from all companies were posted on Sept. 11. Severe weather on June 9 prompted multiple tornado alerts in Winnipeg and southern Manitoba. Tornadoes were confirmed in Dufrost and Ste. Anne, Man, that night.In its letter, Pelmorex said 138 total alerts were sent over the Alert Ready system that night, and they received 30 complaints from the public over the frequency of alerts, some of which were in areas where no tornado risk was reported. “Residents described receiving between 15 and 30 alerts over the course of the evening, some spaced only 2 to 3 minutes apart,” the letter reads, adding that Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) and the Manitoba Emergency Management Organization (EMO) reported receiving similar complaints. Pelmorex said an ECCC member with dual devices received 26 alerts on one phone and 14 alerts on another connected device. Bell Mobility, Telus and Rogers all reported 133 alerts were sent over its network in Manitoba on June 9. Stephen Schmidt from Telus wrote in a letter that the company did not have any technical malfunctions that caused the repeated alerts but said it was due to the frequency and geographic targets provided by Pelmorex. Bell Mobility reported a similar situation. “This high volume of alerts was a result of rapid, successive updates and new alerts being issued in close proximity, often only seconds or minutes apart by ECCC,” the letter from Bell reads. Rogers added the geographic areas targeted by the alerts in Manitoba were large, with coverage ranges at some sites extending past 50 kilometres. “As a result, a single alert could reach subscribers across a broad geographic area, increasing the number of devices receiving successive alerts and updates,” Rogers wrote. Telus, Rogers and Bell all mentioned they would be working on enhancing its infrastructure and introducing a time limit on alerts to prevent a similar situation from happening. Pelmorex said it’s in favour of implementing device-based geofencing for alerts, which would see alerts visible depending on the device’s actual location.
