The FCC continues to drive out any ambiguity on how it interprets Part 97.113. (See previous post EmComm Trouble From the FCC. ) On October 20th, the FCC released Public Notice DA-09-2259, which reiterates the principle of no amateur radio communication on behalf of an employer, even if the employer is a government agency such as a fire or police department. OK, I think they got that point across.
The FCC also described a process for requesting a waiver of this rule for a specific emergency preparedness drill. A governmental entity, not the amateur radio operators involved, must apply to the FCC for a waiver in advance of the drill. According to N5FDL, the FCC intends these waivers to be for very specific events and not a regularly scheduled activity such as a weekly net. This can help facilitate a major event but is still fairly limited. I wonder how many waiver requests the FCC be receiving? I suspect there will be many.
A group of radio amateurs, The Amateur Radio Policy Committee, consisting of N5GAR, WB6NOA and N5FDL have filed a Petition for Rule Making with the FCC to address this situation. Basically, they propose that an additional item be added to the section of rules (Part 97.111) that calls out Authorized Transmissions:
(6) Transmissions necessary for disaster relief or emergency response, including training exercises, planning, drills or tests, without regard to whether the amateur operator has related employment, where the transmissions are for the exclusive use of amateur radio operators for noncommercial purposes.
This seems like a reasonable and measured approach to changing the rules to support emergency communications training activities, without opening the door too wide. I am not sure why they proposed to modify Part 97.111 instead of 97.113 where other employment exceptions are handled (e.g., control operator of a club station that sends telegraphy practice, teacher in a classroom setting). The RAIN Report has an interview with N5FDL concerning this petition.
I still believe the FCC could have avoided this ruckus with a slightly more liberal interpretation of the rules. They didn’t do that, so now we will have to go through the rule making process to deal with the situation. I suppose that the FCC could decline to address the issue but this seems unlikely to me given the legitimate public interest in supporting emergency communications. (Anyone remember 9/11 ?) We’ll likely get to a reasonable outcome that protects the amateur radio service from undesirable encroachment while still enabling emergency communications training.
What do you think?
73, Bob K0NR
Perhaps it’s time for amateur radio to vacate the business of organized emergency communications altogether? I’m not kidding…
The rules are clear that there *are no rules* in the event of a real emergency. Hams or anyone else for that matter can step in and operate over the air in any manner necessary (on any frequency with any power, etc.) if there is a potential for endangerment of life or of property.
Where we seem to be getting into trouble is during the times when that special exemption doesn’t apply.
Like simulated emergency “games” and practice with local officials. Radio amateurs seem to be the only ones at risk here and perhaps now is time for us to simply walk away and wait to offer our services when faced with the “real thing”…?
73 de Jeff, KE9V
Jeff,
While I think your suggestion regarding getting out of EmComm has merit, I don’t think public safety agencies want a bunch of folks with orange ARES vests showing up during a disaster who are not familiar with the way things work.
Training and drills, while not required, keep both groups in tune with each other. It helps the agencies know how Amateur Radio works, but it also helps the Amateur Radio folks know where they fit in into the grand scheme of things.
I think that this is a sign that we’re pushing Emergency Communications far too much in the hobby and neglecting the other parts. This provides up a chance to step back and reevaluate things.
There are so many reasons to keep this prohibition and to reconsider the take over of Amateur Radio Frequencies on a planned basis by served agencies.
One idea that seems to have some merit is the concept of “Freecom.”
I’ve written a bit about it at:
http://k9zw.wordpress.com/?s=freecom
and there is a slowly growing Yahoo Group discussing it.
73
Steve
K9ZW
By the way, I spoke with various ARES/RACES leadership and they are under the (mis)impression this is somehow all about HIPPA.
There is a much misinformation out there, and it would be well advised for any Amateur to touch base with the ARRL, rather than depend on any indirect internet sources, or opinions from others.
73
Steve
K9ZW
Hi Guys,
Thanks for the comments… I have been traveling quite a bit, hence the slow reply.
Reflecting back on this issue, I went back to Part 97.1a and verified that one of the stated purposes of the Amateur Radio Service is:
Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications.
This really isn’t up for debate and from a public policy point of view, it is an important reason why we have access to the frequency spectrum. The debate seems to center on how to implement this purpose.
Jeff’s point is provocative….just walk away until something big happens. I have a hard time seeing this as very effective. I’ve noticed various hams taking this approach on a personal level — no connection at all to ARES, RACES, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc. but then they are surprised that their offer of help during an emergency gets ignored simply because they are a total unknown. It seems like there has to be a base level of training/practice/coordination during normal times to be prepared for The Big One.
The second thing I’ve reflected on is there is a legitimate need to protect the amateur bands from being co-opted by non-amateur interests. In the limit, you could have the local police department doing dispatch on ham frequencies. Clearly, the FCC has blocked that off and it does not seem to be a present danger. I see that the Petition for Rulemaking from N4FDL and crew as a minor tweak that does not open the door too far.
Steve, what do you mean by “the take over of Amateur Radio Frequencies on a planned basis by served agencies”. Do you have specific examples of what you mean?
73, Bob K0NR
I think we would do well to recall that the first time that the government worked with amateur radio on some joint emergency communication system was during WWII with WERS (War Emergency Radio Service). Prior to that, radio amateurs ‘freelanced’ this service to the general public and we grew mightily in fame and stature for it.
Of course there is value in organization but it seems that the government/ham radio/emcomm alliance of the 21st century is a fairly rigid structure with radio hams doing all the dirty work, and apparently risking their license in the process, while the governmental agencies call all the shots.
Doesn’t it seem at least a little odd that US radio hams, who are made up primarily of political conservatives, seem intent on forging even closer connections with a government that they swear doesn’t work?
If your local government was effective when it comes to emergency communications then they wouldn’t need our help.
When did we decide that the best way to lend a hand to our neighbors in time of crisis was to become a de facto agent of the government?
73, Jeff
And the FCC grants their first waiver:
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2009/10/28/11165/
Pingback: This Spewed Out of the Internet #9 at The KØNR Weblog
There are very interesting Emcomm changes afoot.
I’ve commented on the new “professionalization” the ARRL CE program has agreed to: http://k9zw.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/emcomm-professionalization-marches-on/
Very interesting that you no longer need to have an FCC Amateur Radio License to be Emcomm (though you do need permission if you don’t and actually you need the same permission if you are licensed… but they make a distinction…)
Interesting times, and possibly moreso as the rules change.
73
Steve
K9ZW
Pingback: Time to Change Part 97? at The KØNR Weblog