Has anyone looked at the system that the state of Washington has been
testing called MobileIRIS by IOMEDEX. More information can be found at
_http://www.iomedex.com/_ (http://www.iomedex.com/) . From what i was told  when
I singed
up for the system a couple of years ago, the idea is to have an ID  that can be
read in the field and will provide a list of all completed courses  and
training that a responder has taken. In addiction the system can be used to 
track
victims of an incident and data can be entered from the field. Seems like  it
is a good system and I hope that it will selected for use nation wide.

Dave N0EOP



************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

I don't believe there was ever the intent to have ONE national database to hold all credentials for every responder.

What the National Integration Center (NIC) at DHS-FEMA is in the process of doing is developing position descriptions for responders.
This is a list of positions, by skill specialties, and their training/certification/qualification requirements.  This is a work in progress.  http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/rm/guide_rm.shtm and http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/rm/job_titles.shtm from more info on this.

What this means is that there will be standard training for the majority of responders.  The info on these cards will then identify which of these positions an individual is "qualified" to perform, and it could be multiple.  They will also contain important personal information, medical conditions, prescriptions, emergency contact info, etc. 
Also, these cards are called FRAC (First Responder Authentication Cards) and are standardized so that they can be read by standard reads and the data placed into incident or organization databases.

You read more about these smart cards here: http://www.smartcardalliance.org/newsletter/may_2006/letter_0506.html or do a Google search for smart cards or FRAC cards.

Chris, NG3F

--- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, DESloan@... wrote:
>
> I thought that the ID card would link to a national database where skills
> would be recorded. Has this idea now been shelved? I don't think that you will
> get all volunteer fire man trained to the same level. Or even trained to 2 or
> 3 skill sets. You will always have someone who has additional training in
> certain areas. Maybe they are trained as a scuba diver, trained in running
> certain construction equipment, trained in hazmat, trained in high angle rescue,
> etc.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
>

This is the exact issue the NRCEV is trying to address.  Specifically,
the text highlighted.

One standard for the "skills".

If there is not one standard, how do you know what to put on the card?

If everyone puts something different on a card without a standard to
compare it against, what value is the information?

Chris, NG3F  (NRCEV)


--- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, "Chris" <chris.snyder@...> wrote:
>
>
> Updated: 09-03-2007 11:17:27 PM
>
> AP Online
>
> via NewsEdge Corporation
>
> NEW YORK_Retiree Gene O'Brien hurried to the World Trade Center site
> after Sept. 11, 2001, as a volunteer helping to shuttle supplies to
> police and fire workers. Some days, his only ID to get into the
disaster
> site was a tattoo on his forearm.
>
> "A couple times I showed them my Marine tattoo, and they said go
ahead,"
> recalled O'Brien, adding that he and other volunteers also came up
with
> their own makeshift identification cards.
>
> "We didn't forge anything, we just made them up with our own pictures
> and at one point we copied a UPC code off a Pepsi can and they were as
> good as gold," said the Scarsdale resident.
>
> It might not be so easy the next time disaster strikes.
>
> In an effort to provide better control and coordination, the federal
> government is launching an ambitious ID program for rescue workers to
> keep everyday people from swarming to a disaster scene. A prototype of
> the new first responder identification card is already being issued to
> fire and police personnel in the Washington, D.C., area.
>
> Proponents say the system will get professionals on scene quicker and
> keep untrained volunteers from making tough work more difficult.
>
> But they also know it is a touchy subject, particularly for those
> devoted to helping in moments of crisis.
>
> "Wow, how in the world do we say this without love and respect in our
> hearts?" said deputy assistant U.S. Fire Administrator Charlie
> Dickinson.
>
> "Everybody wants to come to the fight, so to speak, and no one wants
to
> step back and say 'No, I can't do this.' The final coup de grace was
the
> World Trade Center. Hundreds came that were never asked," Dickinson
> said. "Good intentions, good hearts, and it was extremely difficult
for
> the fire department and the other departments to deal with them."
>
> The Federal Emergency Management Agency came up with the idea after
the
> World Trade Center attack and Hurricane Katrina in 2005, when
countless
> Americans rushed to help - unasked, undirected, and sometimes
unwanted.
>
> Many of those volunteers angrily dispute the notion they were a
burden.
> They insist that in many instances they were able to deliver
> respirators, hard hats, and protective boots to workers when no one
else
> seemed able.
>
> Ground zero volunteer Rhonda Shearer and her daughter launched a
> fast-moving supply system that bypassed regular channels, often
> infuriating city officials.
>
> Even as she delivered box trucks packed with supplies over months of
> recovery work, she increasingly ended up in a cat-and-mouse game with
> New York City's police and emergency management agency.
>
> Shearer, 53, said the experience convinced her that agencies are
> ill-equipped to handle major disasters - but don't want outsiders
> pointing out their failings.
>
> Similar frustrations arose after Katrina, when people were shocked
that
> the government struggled to take basic supplies such as water to the
> worst areas.
>
> "They're more worried about keeping volunteers out than doing an
> analysis of what really went wrong," Shearer said. "Independent
citizens
> need to be involved, where we have no ax to grind or cross to bear.
But
> we will tell the truth, and we will tell what we see and bear witness
to
> the incompetence."
>
> Dickinson, the federal fire official, said the government is not
trying
> to discourage volunteers, but he thinks there should come a time,
within
> a few days of a disaster, when civilians step back and let the
> professionals take control.
>
> Supporters say the ID cards could be checked at a disaster area with a
> card-reader device and used to verify a person's unique skills. For
> example, if police officers have been trained to handle hazardous
> materials, officials at the scene could deploy them to an area where
> their skills would be best put to use.
>
> For reasons ranging from general safety to protection from lawsuits,
> construction and demolition companies want to see a disaster ID card
> program succeed.
>
> Mike Taylor, executive director of the National Demolition
Association,
> said his industry is talking with aides to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
> about putting it in place in his state.
>
> "If California goes ahead and does that, it will flow across the
> country.
>
> This is a really smart idea by someone in the Bush administration to
be
> able to control access to the site and frankly, make sure there are no
> untrained people," Taylor said. "If somebody goes running down to the
> site, you have to stop and ask them, wait, are they certified to do
this
> work?"
>
>
>
> <<AP Online -- 09/03/07>>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Emphasis and highlight added by NG3F]
>

Updated: 09-03-2007 11:17:27 PM

AP Online

via NewsEdge Corporation

NEW YORK_Retiree Gene O'Brien hurried to the World Trade Center site after Sept. 11, 2001, as a volunteer helping to shuttle supplies to police and fire workers. Some days, his only ID to get into the disaster site was a tattoo on his forearm.

"A couple times I showed them my Marine tattoo, and they said go ahead," recalled O'Brien, adding that he and other volunteers also came up with their own makeshift identification cards.

"We didn't forge anything, we just made them up with our own pictures and at one point we copied a UPC code off a Pepsi can and they were as good as gold," said the Scarsdale resident.

It might not be so easy the next time disaster strikes.

In an effort to provide better control and coordination, the federal government is launching an ambitious ID program for rescue workers to keep everyday people from swarming to a disaster scene. A prototype of the new first responder identification card is already being issued to fire and police personnel in the Washington, D.C., area.

Proponents say the system will get professionals on scene quicker and keep untrained volunteers from making tough work more difficult.

But they also know it is a touchy subject, particularly for those devoted to helping in moments of crisis.

"Wow, how in the world do we say this without love and respect in our hearts?" said deputy assistant U.S. Fire Administrator Charlie Dickinson.

"Everybody wants to come to the fight, so to speak, and no one wants to step back and say 'No, I can't do this.' The final coup de grace was the World Trade Center. Hundreds came that were never asked," Dickinson said. "Good intentions, good hearts, and it was extremely difficult for the fire department and the other departments to deal with them."

The Federal Emergency Management Agency came up with the idea after the World Trade Center attack and Hurricane Katrina in 2005, when countless Americans rushed to help - unasked, undirected, and sometimes unwanted.

Many of those volunteers angrily dispute the notion they were a burden. They insist that in many instances they were able to deliver respirators, hard hats, and protective boots to workers when no one else seemed able.

Ground zero volunteer Rhonda Shearer and her daughter launched a fast-moving supply system that bypassed regular channels, often infuriating city officials.

Even as she delivered box trucks packed with supplies over months of recovery work, she increasingly ended up in a cat-and-mouse game with New York City's police and emergency management agency.

Shearer, 53, said the experience convinced her that agencies are ill-equipped to handle major disasters - but don't want outsiders pointing out their failings.

Similar frustrations arose after Katrina, when people were shocked that the government struggled to take basic supplies such as water to the worst areas.

"They're more worried about keeping volunteers out than doing an analysis of what really went wrong," Shearer said. "Independent citizens need to be involved, where we have no ax to grind or cross to bear. But we will tell the truth, and we will tell what we see and bear witness to the incompetence."

Dickinson, the federal fire official, said the government is not trying to discourage volunteers, but he thinks there should come a time, within a few days of a disaster, when civilians step back and let the professionals take control.

Supporters say the ID cards could be checked at a disaster area with a card-reader device and used to verify a person's unique skills. For example, if police officers have been trained to handle hazardous materials, officials at the scene could deploy them to an area where their skills would be best put to use.

For reasons ranging from general safety to protection from lawsuits, construction and demolition companies want to see a disaster ID card program succeed.

Mike Taylor, executive director of the National Demolition Association, said his industry is talking with aides to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger about putting it in place in his state.

"If California goes ahead and does that, it will flow across the country.

This is a really smart idea by someone in the Bush administration to be able to control access to the site and frankly, make sure there are no untrained people," Taylor said. "If somebody goes running down to the site, you have to stop and ask them, wait, are they certified to do this work?"

<<AP Online -- 09/03/07>>

[Emphasis and highlight added by NG3F]

----- Original Message -----

From: Chris

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 4:55 PM

Subject: Re: FW: [NRCEV] New Group Member with Questions

Mike and Bob,

Valid question and one that has be asked by others, although not here.

The short answer is: the NRCEV, or any other non-governmental organization for that matter, does not require and legal authorization to certify anyone in a particular field or area.  In fact there doesn't even exist a body, government or otherwise, from which an organization could request such authority if they wanted to.

But, I know that doesn't completely answer your question.  To help I'll send some back to you (rhetorically though) to help illustrate the point.  Where does the National Registry of EMT's get their authority to certify EMT's?  Where to medical certification boards get their authority to certify Doctors in their specialties?  The answer is the same as with the NRCEV, nowhere. 

The difference between these organizations and the NRCEV, primarily, is that the NRCEV is brand new and these others have been around for some time.  I'm sure these organizations where asked exactly the same question by those they were seeking to certify when they began their programs.  But since they have been around and are "common place" the natural assumption is that "someone authorized them to perform this function".  Inaccurate, but natural all the same.

The only organizations which require any legal authority are those that are mandated to perform these functions, e.g. government agencies/departments for government mandated certifications.

I want to again quote the federal government's definition of certification (posted on our website) : "the process by which a non-governmental organization grants recognition to an individual who has met predetermined qualifications specified by that organization."  And NOCA's definition: "a process, often voluntary, by which individuals who have demonstrated the level of knowledge and skill required in the profession, occupation, role, or skill are identified to the public and other stake-holders."

While there is not "legal" authority needed to issue certifications, the "real" authority comes from the community in which the certifications are issued and those who interact with that community.  For Doctor's that is the medical community, for the National Registry of EMTs it is the EMS community.  Ultimately the authority comes from the recognition of a certification, by an organization, as a valid instrument for assessing a community's member's qualifications.

One such way to help achieve that recognition is by having the certification program and organization assessed by a third party, such as NOCA or ANSI, and for the organization to receive Accreditation by such a body.  Such an accreditation does not automatically imply or bestow some legal authority to the certifying organization to issue it's certification, but it does serve the purpose of providing a level of quality assurance and integrity for the certifying organization.  Such an accreditation can assist the certifying organization in gaining the trust and recognition from those it is trying to serve.  However, it must be noted that there are criteria an organization must meet prior to even being able to apply for accreditation from bodies such as NOCA or ANSI.  These criteria differ from body to body, but include ones such as number of certifications issued, having been operating and administering certification programs for specified period of time etc.  And the NRCEV has not yet met these criteria.  That will come in time.

How do we certify folks?

Basically as the definitions above outline.  We established standards (e.g. our certification requirements) and process for evaluating/verifying that those standards have been met. 

That sounds pretty simple. In a sense it is.  The evaluation/verification of where or not an applicant has met the establish standards is the easiest part. What isn't is in the determination of what should or should not be in the standards, why or why not and then administering the program, keep up on current trends and other matters which may influence the standards, evaluating the validity of the standards through feedback from prospective certificants, such as occurs on this forum, and by other means, keep up on governmental initiatives, statues and recommendations etc.

I hope that helps answer your question.  If not, let me why or what I didn't address.

Chris - NG3F, NRCEV

--- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, "Robert F. Crifasi" <CrifasiRF@...> wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> Hi. I was about to post the some of the same questions. I would
> like to hear the answers for similar reasons.
>
> Particularly: "How does NRCEV certify anyone, and under what authority?"
>
>
>
> Bob Crifasi KC2RFC
>
> Essex County ARES DEC
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NRCEV@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> mthoeft
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 11:10 PM
> To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [NRCEV] New Group Member with Questions
>
>
>
> Hello All,
> I am newly joined to this group as a result of reading posts locally
> on the Essex County forum...
>
> How does NRCEV certify anyone, and under what authority?
> In this day and age of super-liability, does the NRCEV have the
> backing, and quite possibly the legal resources needed to defend one
> of its certfied members in case of an issue of vicarious liability?
> It is something that comes up daily in the public sector.
>
> I am trying to keep an open mind on this, and am honestly 'on the
> fence' waiting to push the virtual send button on my
> application......can somebody(s) weigh in on this and offer some
> guidance?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike Hoeft K2MPH
>

Mike and Bob,

Valid question and one that has be asked by others, although not here.

The short answer is: the NRCEV, or any other non-governmental organization for that matter, does not require and legal authorization to certify anyone in a particular field or area.  In fact there doesn't even exist a body, government or otherwise, from which an organization could request such authority if they wanted to.

But, I know that doesn't completely answer your question.  To help I'll send some back to you (rhetorically though) to help illustrate the point.  Where does the National Registry of EMT's get their authority to certify EMT's?  Where to medical certification boards get their authority to certify Doctors in their specialties?  The answer is the same as with the NRCEV, nowhere. 

The difference between these organizations and the NRCEV, primarily, is that the NRCEV is brand new and these others have been around for some time.  I'm sure these organizations where asked exactly the same question by those they were seeking to certify when they began their programs.  But since they have been around and are "common place" the natural assumption is that "someone authorized them to perform this function".  Inaccurate, but natural all the same.

The only organizations which require any legal authority are those that are mandated to perform these functions, e.g. government agencies/departments for government mandated certifications.

I want to again quote the federal government's definition of certification (posted on our website) : "the process by which a non-governmental organization grants recognition to an individual who has met predetermined qualifications specified by that organization."  And NOCA's definition: "a process, often voluntary, by which individuals who have demonstrated the level of knowledge and skill required in the profession, occupation, role, or skill are identified to the public and other stake-holders."

While there is not "legal" authority needed to issue certifications, the "real" authority comes from the community in which the certifications are issued and those who interact with that community.  For Doctor's that is the medical community, for the National Registry of EMTs it is the EMS community.  Ultimately the authority comes from the recognition of a certification, by an organization, as a valid instrument for assessing a community's member's qualifications.

One such way to help achieve that recognition is by having the certification program and organization assessed by a third party, such as NOCA or ANSI, and for the organization to receive Accreditation by such a body.  Such an accreditation does not automatically imply or bestow some legal authority to the certifying organization to issue it's certification, but it does serve the purpose of providing a level of quality assurance and integrity for the certifying organization.  Such an accreditation can assist the certifying organization in gaining the trust and recognition from those it is trying to serve.  However, it must be noted that there are criteria an organization must meet prior to even being able to apply for accreditation from bodies such as NOCA or ANSI.  These criteria differ from body to body, but include ones such as number of certifications issued, having been operating and administering certification programs for specified period of time etc.  And the NRCEV has not yet met these criteria.  That will come in time.

How do we certify folks?

Basically as the definitions above outline.  We established standards (e.g. our certification requirements) and process for evaluating/verifying that those standards have been met. 

That sounds pretty simple. In a sense it is.  The evaluation/verification of where or not an applicant has met the establish standards is the easiest part. What isn't is in the determination of what should or should not be in the standards, why or why not and then administering the program, keep up on current trends and other matters which may influence the standards, evaluating the validity of the standards through feedback from prospective certificants, such as occurs on this forum, and by other means, keep up on governmental initiatives, statues and recommendations etc.

I hope that helps answer your question.  If not, let me why or what I didn't address.

Chris - NG3F, NRCEV

--- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, "Robert F. Crifasi" <CrifasiRF@...> wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> Hi. I was about to post the some of the same questions. I would
> like to hear the answers for similar reasons.
>
> Particularly: "How does NRCEV certify anyone, and under what authority?"
>
>
>
> Bob Crifasi KC2RFC
>
> Essex County ARES DEC
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NRCEV@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> mthoeft
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 11:10 PM
> To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [NRCEV] New Group Member with Questions
>
>
>
> Hello All,
> I am newly joined to this group as a result of reading posts locally
> on the Essex County forum...
>
> How does NRCEV certify anyone, and under what authority?
> In this day and age of super-liability, does the NRCEV have the
> backing, and quite possibly the legal resources needed to defend one
> of its certfied members in case of an issue of vicarious liability?
> It is something that comes up daily in the public sector.
>
> I am trying to keep an open mind on this, and am honestly 'on the
> fence' waiting to push the virtual send button on my
> application......can somebody(s) weigh in on this and offer some
> guidance?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike Hoeft K2MPH
>

Mike:
     I found at least a partial answer to our questions in the FAQ's on
the NRCEV web site.

"The primary organization which the NRCEV will be seeking recogition,
and more accurately accredication from is the National Organization for
Compentency Assurance (NOCA). Established in 1977, the National
Organization for Competency Assurance (NOCA) is the leader in setting
quality standards for credentialing organizations.  NOCA oversees an
accredidation body, The National Commission for Certifying Agencies
(NCCA). "

    Essex County EmComm is a very new organization as well, so I
understand the struggle of what to do first to gain acceptance and
recognition. I actually hope this succeeds. It is a good idea, and
seems to be getting done in a responsible manor. (Proof reading aside.)
Something like this is long overdue.

Bob Crifasi KC2RFC

Hello All,
I am newly joined to this group as a result of reading posts locally
on the Essex County forum.
Being employed in Law Enforcement, specifically as a Communications
Center Manager, and as a ham radio operator active in ARES, RACES,
OEM, Skywarn, etc for nearly 25 years I am reading the posts in this
group with much interest.
Katrina and Rita taught the public sector many lessons about getting
ready to respond to disasters. Among them was the need to create
pools of trained, certified public safety telecommunicators (ie,
police, fire and ems dispatchers and comm center personnel) to
assist 'affected' agencies in times of disaster. It is under this
concept that the NJTI-TERT (Telecommunications Emergency Reponse
Teams) has been born. TERT leaders from around the country
successfully lobbied FEMA last year to be included on the "list of
deployable resources" via the Emergency Management Assistance Compact
(EMAC). TERT created a minimum standards list for anyone wishing to
be a part of this effort, from the basic PST all the way up to
supervisors, IT personnel, etc. What TERT did not do, is certify
anyone......they were neither asked or required to.....that is a
point I am stuck on with NRCEV from what I have read so far......
How does NRCEV certify anyone, and under what authority?
In this day and age of super-liability, does the NRCEV have the
backing, and quite possibly the legal resources needed to defend one
of its certfied members in case of an issue of vicarious liability?
It is something that comes up daily in the public sector.

I am trying to keep an open mind on this, and am honestly 'on the
fence' waiting to push the virtual send button on my
application......can somebody(s) weigh in on this and offer some
guidance?

Thanks

Mike Hoeft K2MPH

Chris,

Most of this post is a direct quote from the Essex County EmComm forum.

     I am responding to your original post because I am convinced that it is relevant to one of the major stumbling blocks for us in Essex County. I believe if we can organize ourselves into a functioning team, and demonstrate our competence to the public we would have no problem with acceptance from the county and municipal government. NRCEV may well be a way for each of us and individuals to demonstrate that competence in short order. I believe it could provide additional momentum to help us organize ourselves into a well functioning organization. Certification is by no means a substitute for real practice and experience. It may provide each of us, as individuals, the confidence to draw together as a team. It could also gain us the recognition many of us seem to be asking for. I would be happy to see similar conversations to the one your post sparked on the Essex County EmComm forum.

    We are struggling to pull together a well functioning group in a county where ham involvement has not been welcome. It can not be done by will alone.

Bob Crifasi KC2RFC

Essex County DEC

----- Original Message -----

From: N4AOF

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 11:23 PM

Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

> Could it be that you are saying that due to high
> levels of interference and static that CW would get
> through where the voice or digital modes (maybe Pactor
> III excepted) would not be intelligible? Could it be
> that for some reason the VHF/UHF spectrum would be
> unusable and our portable repeater jump kits wouldn't
> work?

He is still living in the imaginary world of the ARRL where "Emergency
Communications" consists of hams sending formal message traffic to other
hams -- with no connection to any emergency agency at either end --
providing long haul HF communications on the assumption that all the long
haul phone lines are out, all the satellite links are down, all the
microwave links are down, government HF links are down, the internet is
down, and only Ham Radio HF communications are left to save the day.

Meanwhile this all ignores the simple fact that more than 90% of critical
emergency communications consist of immediate local tactical messages which
are almost always handled as voice traffic on VHF and UHF.

> Could it be that you are saying that due to high
> levels of interference and static that CW would get
> through where the voice or digital modes (maybe Pactor
> III excepted) would not be intelligible?  Could it be
> that for some reason the VHF/UHF spectrum would be
> unusable and our portable repeater jump kits wouldn't
> work?

He is still living in the imaginary world of the ARRL where "Emergency
Communications" consists of hams sending formal message traffic to other
hams -- with no connection to any emergency agency at either end --
providing long haul HF communications on the assumption that all the long
haul phone lines are out, all the satellite links are down, all the
microwave links are down, government HF links are down, the internet is
down, and only Ham Radio HF communications are left to save the day.

Meanwhile this all ignores the simple fact that more than 90% of critical
emergency communications consist of immediate local tactical messages which
are almost always handled as voice traffic on VHF and UHF.

Do you mean to say that CW is the only mode that might
work in the early stages of an emergency?  While I am
an avid CW person (though not on the air very often) I
just don't see where CW would have much of an
advantage over SSB since most portable HF rigs do both
equally well and ALL HF antennas (properly tuned for
resonance, or connected to a tuner) do not
discriminate among modes.

Could it be that you are saying that due to high
levels of interference and static that CW would get
through where the voice or digital modes (maybe Pactor
III excepted) would not be intelligible?  Could it be
that for some reason the VHF/UHF spectrum would be
unusable and our portable repeater jump kits wouldn't
work?

Can you please explain your logic so that maybe those
of us who just haven't seen the light will better
understand?  Maybe we have missed a vital link in
emmcomm.

Leaving no stone unturned,
Robert
WB4DHC



--- wb5izd <wb5izd@...> wrote:

>
>
> The sentence should have stated "during THE START
> and immediately AFTER THE START of the emergency".
> That means during the time the infrastructure is
> still being destroyed and before recovery efforts
> can get underway.  It should also be noted that when
> a larger area is affected that some places can lag
> well behind others when it comes to the start of
> recovery.
>
>
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: N4AOF
>   To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 11:16 PM
>   Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do
>
>
>   
>
>   What world are you living in?
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: wb5izd
>     To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com
>     Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 13:05
>     Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do
>
>
>     During and immediately after the emergency, it's
> quite possible cw may be the only communications
> method available.
>
>




________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php

----- Original Message -----

From: N4AOF

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 11:16 PM

Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do



What world are you living in?

----- Original Message -----

From: wb5izd

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 13:05

Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

During and immediately after the emergency, it's quite possible cw may be the only communications method available.

----- Original Message -----

From: wb5izd

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 13:05

Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

During and immediately after the emergency, it's quite possible cw may be the only communications method available.

----- Original Message -----

From: N4AOF

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 7:53 PM

Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do



I started to reply to this message but I gave up.  Every time I read a paragraph and started to develop part of a discussion I found that the next paragraph contradicted what Charles had said before.

 

At more than point he says the role of amateur radio is to force the people originating messages to rewrite their messages until the text makes good sense to the ham radio operator; yet at other points he touts the use of winlink which is designed to take the ham radio operator out of the look in handling message traffic.  He says it is important the radio operators don't do anything except operate their radios, but then describes the importance of being trained in all areas of every possible emergency (which is apparently important so we can know when the people in charge are doing things wrong so we can better correct their messages).

 

----- Original Message -----

From: wb5izd

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 18:15

Subject: Fw: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

----- Original Message -----

From: wb5izd

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 18:15

Subject: Fw: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

I don't think these exercises are rare at all.   I think that hams committing to
what it takes to be actively included and then doing the job are what is rare.
Sometimes we sound like Rodney Dangerfield.  " I don't get no respect. "    We
have had a relationship with EMA since the mid 70's.
The relationship was so solid when the EMA director was looking for a new
assistant director he wanted a ham in the position, not just a licensed person,
but an active ham.  10 years later, when a new EMA was hired, the assistant got
the new director to get a license.   This guy is now really gung ho about hams
and what we can do.

Now I can already hear Rodney out there thinking, but or EMA doesn't give us the
time of day.   But this relationship didn't happen overnight.  It was built over
years of commitment to improving the local ARES group and making sure that we
did what EMA asked.    We have gone from a UHF/VHF station down the hall from
the EOC, to a COMM Room dominiated by amateur radio equipment connected to the
EOC.  4 UHF/VHF stations and 2 HF stations.   Why?  Because we showed we could
do the job with what we had. Then we had the clout to get what we needed to do
it better.

EMA went to bat for us when we were losing a prime repeater space on a local TV
tower.   EMA suggests ham radio to other organizations.    EMA shows off its
amateur radio equipment and operators.

A Certification process will help, but it is not a magic bullet.  It will help
you get your foot in the door, but you still have to perform.
Hams can do the job, many groups are providing emergency communications for big
and small emergencies.

Great to those that are, great to those working on establishing those
relationships.




---- N4AOF <N4AOF@...> wrote:
> Absolutely excellent, Ron, but I think you would have to agree that such
> exercises are even more rare than actual communications emergencies.
>
> ==========================================
>
> Sorry you missed the big region 5 exercise put on by Ky Office of
> Homeland Security on April 19th Tom! Amateur radio absolutely ran the
> show in the ice storm scenario. All EOC's activated as did a
> Multi-Agency Coordination Center or MACC. Several mobile command
> vehicles came into service such as the one owned by the regional
> WMD/Haz-Mat/ Bio response team which was designed and built by hams. It
> carries everything from public safety and sat phone communications to
> amateur radio, fax and satellite internet connection. Several hospitals
> also had amateur radio activated in their facility command centers.
> Communications were conducted by better than 90% amateur radio personnel
> on all the frequencies and modes used. Aside from handling real world
> events during the exercise, the E-911 Centers stayed clear out of it and
> let the hams do the job.
>
> As a side note, amateur radio operators in Ky Region five have never had
> a full blown Katrina sized response, ever. Aside from community and
> regional exercises and real SkyWarn weather nets in severe weather
> operations, these folks have had little chance at anything huge. One
> county's hams, in the past notorious for not getting involved regularly,
> even put on a good show and have decided to get more involved on a
> regular basis now.
>
> End result: Facilities and governments very impressed and many even
> going to the trouble to allow (even to purchase!) fixed amateur radio
> gear where none ever permanently was before. Mission accomplished. Just
> being involved at any level can and will help make a difference.
>
> We as amateur radio operators don't need a "disaster of the week", just
> people who stay in the loop.
>
> 73,
> Ron Dodson, KA4MAP
> Former SEC Ky
>
>
>
>
> http://www.nrcev.org
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Absolutely excellent, Ron, but I think you would have to agree that such
exercises are even more rare than actual communications emergencies.

==========================================

Sorry you missed the big region 5 exercise put on by Ky Office of
Homeland Security on April 19th Tom! Amateur radio absolutely ran the
show in the ice storm scenario. All EOC's activated as did a
Multi-Agency Coordination Center or MACC. Several mobile command
vehicles came into service such as the one owned by the regional
WMD/Haz-Mat/ Bio response team which was designed and built by hams. It
carries everything from public safety and sat phone communications to
amateur radio, fax and satellite internet connection. Several hospitals
also had amateur radio activated in their facility command centers.
Communications were conducted by better than 90% amateur radio personnel
on all the frequencies and modes used. Aside from handling real world
events during the exercise, the E-911 Centers stayed clear out of it and
let the hams do the job.

As a side note, amateur radio operators in Ky Region five have never had
a full blown Katrina sized response, ever. Aside from community and
regional exercises and real SkyWarn weather nets in severe weather
operations, these folks have had little chance at anything huge. One
county's hams, in the past notorious for not getting involved regularly,
even put on a good show and have decided to get more involved on a
regular basis now.

End result: Facilities and governments very impressed and many even
going to the trouble to allow (even to purchase!) fixed amateur radio
gear where none ever permanently was before. Mission accomplished. Just
being involved at any level can and will help make a difference.

We as amateur radio operators don't need a "disaster of the week", just
people who stay in the loop.

73,
Ron Dodson, KA4MAP
Former SEC Ky

N4AOF wrote:
> There are "lots of things one can do"
> on a regular basis, but emergency communications simply is not one
of those
> things.

I still disagree, and again I lift up Orange County Hospital Disaster
Support Communications System (under ARES) as an example that
hospitals can be a real, regular need that is without doubt
underserved in most urban areas of the country.

> the difference between Emergency Communications versus all these
other kinds
> of Public Service communications
> is the key to the original discussion

Yes, but my message was indeed focused on real emergency
communications opportunities.  HDSCS has responded 99 times when
comms were actually down or overloaded at one or more hospitals in
our area.  This URL is the story of one of our longer activations,
when a backhoe dug up all phone/internet cabling into and out of
Tustin Hospital.

http://members.aol.com/emcom4hosp/tustin04.html

Let's be clear:  When Nurse Nancy at Memorial Hospital can't use her
phone to get stat medication orders or patient admitting instructions
from Dr. Dan at his office, it's a real communications emergency.
That's just one example of the kinds of messages that HDSCS hams
handle in our activations.

> Unfortunately my observation has generally been that ham
> radio involvement with such agencies is mostly just on paper.  "The
Plan"
> includes ham radio support -- but the agencies rarely drill the
plan and
> when they do the ham radio support is either not played or is
played
> separately from the agency activities.

I have to agree that it's generally true.  But HDSCS has chosen to do
better in our 153 drills to date.  We participate in all the drill
planning meetings at the table with the hospital and EMS officials.
We usually have the hospitals perform the actual ham callout as part
of the drill, to test our activation procedures.  When our hams are
at the hospitals on drill day, they are shoulder-to-shoulder with the
staff in the hospital Command Centers and other hospital units.  We
pass THEIR drill messages, not stuff we make up for ourselves.  We
actively participate in the critiques afterwards.  And so on...

Why don't more ham emergency groups do this?  Well, it's lots of
extra work.  Most hams don't realize the importance and value of
doing it, so they don't.  I think NRCEV could help to change this
attitude.

By the way, we do almost all of our own training, based on our real
experiences.  That's another advantage of spending a lot of time "in
the arena."  We have an annual 8-hour workshop, regular training
meetings, and a new Certified Hospital Communicator level that
requires experience, training and testing to achieve.

> In the rare instances where NDMS would be used, by definition, it
would
> not involve emergency communications, because NDMS is activated in
an
> unaffected area to receive casualties coming from a disaster

Let's think outside the box and remember that receiving large numbers
of casualties will put a BIG stress on comms of the receiving
hospitals and the EMS agencies in the receiving areas.  Below my
signature is our Web writeup of HDSCS participation in a major NDMS
drill involving nine hospitals and the Joint Forces Training Base at
Los Alamitos.  As you can see, ham radio did have an important role
to play, as it would if the scenario were to actually happen.  This
fact and our importance to smoothly-flowing communications was
recognized by both the hospitals and by NDMS officials at the
critique.

73,
Joe Moell K0OV
Assistant Coordinator, HDSCSC
----------------------------------
Drill #142:  HDSCS was a key participant in the National Disaster
Medical System (NDMS) drill on November 19, 2005.  If large numbers
of military casualties ever overwhelm the overseas military medical
system, NDMS will coordinate their transportation and distribution to
civilian stateside hospitals.  This system may also transport victims
to Orange County hospitals if there were large numbers of civilian
casualties from a catastrophic incident in another region of the
USA.  NDMS would be activated following a major incident in our area
that overwhelms our hospital capacities and requires patients to be
moved to other regions of the country.  Orange County, because of its
excellent EMS planning and backup support to hospitals (which
includes HDSCS), is near the top of the national list for receipt of
NDMS casualties.  Because we have activation plans already in place,
have established familiarity with the hospitals and are trained to be
portable and flexible, HDSCS is considered to be an important
resource if Orange County hospitals and county EMS were to become
officially activated by NDMS.  This drill simulated the air transport
of approximately 90 stabilized patients into the Joint Forces
Training Base at Los Alamitos for distribution among OC hospitals.
Because notification of such transport is made one day in advance,
HDSCS operators were in place at nine hospitals and at JFTB when the
patients touched down.  HDSCS provided up-to-the-minute ambulance
transport notification to each hospital.  At the same time, Chapman
Hospital simulated an external telephone system failure and HDSCS
provided backup communications, including a message to a sister
facility to obtain endotrachial tubes.  Bruce Chappell KE6TSM, Roman
Kamienski KG6QMZ and Dennis Kidder WA6NIA communicated from the
JFTB.  At the hospitals were Jerry Drukin AC6FC, Bob Evans W6TQC,
Mark Kern KE6QXF, Jim McLaughlin AB6UF, Joe Moell K0OV, David Mofford
W7KTS, Art Rios KD6LBV, Ken Simpson W6KOS, Richard Soikkeli WD6ERY,
Clay Stearns KE6TZR, Scott Stys KG6LJY, Alex Valdez KG6WKK, Fred
Wagner KQ6Q, John Walker AC7GK, Corky Walker KG6YWY, Woody Woodward
KJ6LE, Larry Zysman N6BNM.  Net controls were Jack Hafner KO6IC and
April Moell WA6OPS.

> This has been a great topic and I'm not trying to cut it short, but
> I want to throw a twist in to keep discussion here, at least
> partially addressing Certification.
>
> Question - What part, if any, would a standard certification, on the
> lines of the NRCEV certifications, play within this discussion?

Let me answer that question in reverse (where I think it has a stronger
link)...

I see some sort of experience as a vital element in upper level
certifications

I think most people here would agree that real communications emergencies
are thankfully rare in the US, therefore many EComm operators are likely to
get most of their 'experience' in non-emergency activities and in drills
(such as both described so well in Ron Dodson's messages).

With that in mind, I would be interested in seeing some discussion of just
what sort of activities and drills should be considered equivalent to real
EComm experience.  I have to say that I have seen some drills that were more
stressful than some real EComm assignments - so certainly there are drills
that are every bit as good as the real thing as a learning experience - and
there are also drills that consist of nothing more than simulating passing a
couple of pieces of scripted traffic, sometimes with the traffic even being
introduced at the "receiving" end instead of being originated somewhere.
From a EComm aspect such "drills" are no more realistic than a table top
exercise.

73 de N4AOF

OK
Will now that's a case of you have to show your self off.  Most of the
people in the powers that be area don't know that oh for instanst that most
cell sites only have ups's that are good for about twenty moments or so.
Then they go dark with out power.  A group that I belong to asked and got
the county board chairmen and several other county board members to work
with us at the SET and they were amazed at what we as ham's could do.  To
the point that a few months later during Ham Radio Month we got a very nice
resolution from the County board as a whole. show off your stuff let them
see you doing what you do.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Dodson" <ka4map@...>
To: <NRCEV@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 10:06 AM
Subject: RE: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do


N4AOF wrote:

To the extent that the ham radio organizations are actually involved in
serving these agencies, it would represent good PRACTICE for emergency
communications.  Unfortunately my observation has generally been that
ham
radio involvement with such agencies is mostly just on paper.  "The
Plan"
includes ham radio support -- but the agencies rarely drill the plan and

when they do the ham radio support is either not played or is played
separately from the agency activities.  Instead of reinforcing a close
working relationship between ham radio and the Served Agency, all too
often
such drills reinforce the mistaken concept that Emergency Communications

consists of hams-talking-to-other-hams.

==========================================

Sorry you missed the big region 5 exercise put on by Ky Office of
Homeland Security on April 19th Tom! Amateur radio absolutely ran the
show in the ice storm scenario. All EOC's activated as did a
Multi-Agency Coordination Center or MACC. Several mobile command
vehicles came into service such as the one owned by the regional
WMD/Haz-Mat/ Bio response team which was designed and built by hams. It
carries everything from public safety and sat phone communications to
amateur radio, fax and satellite internet connection. Several hospitals
also had amateur radio activated in their facility command centers.
Communications were conducted by better than 90% amateur radio personnel
on all the frequencies and modes used. Aside from handling real world
events during the exercise, the E-911 Centers stayed clear out of it and
let the hams do the job.

As a side note, amateur radio operators in Ky Region five have never had
a full blown Katrina sized response, ever. Aside from community and
regional exercises and real SkyWarn weather nets in severe weather
operations, these folks have had little chance at anything huge. One
county's hams, in the past notorious for not getting involved regularly,
even put on a good show and have decided to get more involved on a
regular basis now.

End result: Facilities and governments very impressed and many even
going to the trouble to allow (even to purchase!) fixed amateur radio
gear where none ever permanently was before. Mission accomplished. Just
being involved at any level can and will help make a difference.

We as amateur radio operators don't need a "disaster of the week", just
people who stay in the loop.

73,
Ron Dodson, KA4MAP
Former SEC Ky


-----Original Message-----
From: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NRCEV@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
N4AOF
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:16 PM
To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Dodson
Subject: RE: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

> Joe Moell K0OV wrote:
>> I disagree. With a little effort, hams COULD have important jobs to
>> do on a week-to-week basis.
>
> I agree. In Kentucky we have several groups who assist regular
> localized activities.

But NOT Emergency Communications -- the difference between Emergency
Communications versus all these other kinds of Public Service
communications
is the key to the original discussion

> In western Kentucky, we have one group who regularly
> assists local EMA with checks on county storm warning
> devices (Sirens). They report on any which fail to activate
> during regular scheduled tests.

Scheduled siren tests bear no resembelence to emergency communications

This is a valuable service to the community.

Even more than just a valuable service to the community, it is
especially
important in that it maintains an on-going working relationship between
local hams and the EMA.

But it isn't Emergency Communications....
It isn't even practice for Emergency Communications

Again I am in no way disparaging the value of such service both the the
community and to ham radio.

> Another northern Kentucky ARES group are
> called in on almost any lost person search to
> support the law enforcement search efforts and
> yes, they are trained in lost person search and
> in many cases a good deal of the members have
> even taken search management training.

Now THIS may be Emergency Communications, or at least good practice for
Emergency Communications -- IF the hams are called to provide
communications
for the search rather than simply being a good source of ready manpower
for
the search.

Again (either way) it is a valuable service to the community.

And again (either way) it is important in that it maintains an on-going
working relationship between local hams and their local emergency
services
agencies.

> Other groups work with local CitizenCorps CERT’s

I'll pass on this one, because the role of emergency communicators in
CERT
is a potentially controversial issue.

> and regional National Disaster Medical System (NDMS)

Actually working with NDMS could involve emergency communications under
some
circumstances.  But there are two realities which go against including
NDMS
as an example of routine callouts of hams for emergency communications
work:
1. NDMS hardly ever gets called out at all (and hardly ever runs serious

drills)
2. In the rare instances where NDMS would be used, by definition, it
would
not involve emergency communications, because NDMS is activated in an
unaffected area to receive casualties coming from a disaster or other
mass
casualty event.

> and Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS) activities
> while others work with regional weapons of mass destruction/
> haz-mat/ bio response teams that our state homeland security
> operate.

To the extent that the ham radio organizations are actually involved in
serving these agencies, it would represent good PRACTICE for emergency
communications.  Unfortunately my observation has generally been that
ham
radio involvement with such agencies is mostly just on paper.  "The
Plan"
includes ham radio support -- but the agencies rarely drill the plan and

when they do the ham radio support is either not played or is played
separately from the agency activities.  Instead of reinforcing a close
working relationship between ham radio and the Served Agency, all too
often
such drills reinforce the mistaken concept that Emergency Communications

consists of hams-talking-to-other-hams.

> One south central Ky group performs “Highway Overpass
> Watch” details assisting local law enforcement in preventing
> trouble at interstate overpasses on events such as Halloween
> night.

Copy and Paste my comments about the Siren Tests here.  ;-)

> There is a world of things one can do if you make the
> right connections and carry out requests responsibly.

ABSOLUTELY TRUE -- and both the contacts and the "things one can do" are

important -- but the are not emergency communications.

The original point someone made was that Emergency Communications is
different from routine "emergency" services like Fire, Police, and EMS;
and
that point is also absolutely true.   There are "lots of things one can
do"
on a regular basis, but emergency communications simply is not one of
those
things.

73 de N4AOF





http://www.nrcev.org
Yahoo! Groups Links




Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007
2:03 PM


Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007
2:03 PM




http://www.nrcev.org
Yahoo! Groups Links

Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007 2:03 PM

Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007 2:03 PM

This has been a great topic and I'm not trying to cut it short, but
I want to throw a twist in to keep discussion here, at least
partially addressing Certification.

Question - What part, if any, would a standard certification, on the
lines of the NRCEV certifications, play within this discussion?

Part of this discussion revolves around have "enough" for folks to
do to keep them interested and part deals with gaining the trust of
served agencies so that they are comfortable including EmComm
volunteers on a regular and meaningfull basis.

In the KY Region 5 exercise Don mentioned there were hams that never
worked together before or served agencies were not familiar with.
Was any part of the after action discussion about credentialling and
or standard training?

Just curious - what your input?

Chris, NG3F
NRCEV


--- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, "homingin73" <Homingin@...> wrote:
>
> Doug wrote:
> >That is a lack of a job to do.  Fortunately
> >communications emergencies are rare events.
>
> I disagree.  With a little effort, hams COULD have important jobs
to
> do on a week-to-week basis.  There are potential clients that will
use
> us.  It may be true that "all else fails" events are rare, but
> communications disruptions do occur regularly.  If hams are ready
and
> callout systems are in place, we can serve agencies in these
> emergencies, getting valuable on-the-job training and developing
> excellent rapport with agency leaders.
>
> Take a look at www.hdscs.org
>
> This ARES group has never had an "all else fails" disaster, but in
25
> years it has responded almost 100 times to provide valuable service
> when hospital patients' lives were at risk due to comms
interruptions.
>  Ask any hospital disaster planner or Emergency Medical Services
> Agency person in Orange County about ham radio and they will have
> plenty of good things to say because of this continuous level of
> preparedness and service.
>
> That brings me to my beef with ARRL leadership -- it has been too
> focused on "all else fails" Katrina-like disasters and has not paid
> enough attention to hams' providing valuable support in
the "little"
> emergencies that will cement our bonds with agencies and get us
ready
> for the really big events.
>
> 73,
> Joe Moell K0OV
> Assistant Coordinator, HDSCS
>

I agree -- training kicks in when the chips are down.  If you are comfortable
with your radio and with net discipline then it will be easier when things are
hot and heavy.    If you have the comfort of the routine nature of a net, then
your stress goes down.

The routine and less than dire emergency IS training.   It is different running
to train for the marathon that it is to run in the marathon.

You have to establish trust first.  That means handling the non critical
communications for these groups.

Ham radio is part of our local MMRS - a very big part.  We cover 20 sites over 7
counties.  The hospitals love us, we are trained in using their radios as well
so use us more than others. But we always drill as if we are the only game in
town.   Even when the drill was to test the new 800 mhz system, we responded and
we were used.    It isn't what the drill is testing, it is what WE are tesing. 
Hospitals will not only fax their info, but hand it to the hams to be relayed to
the EOC. It is the procedure.  Our drills will routinely stop use of cell phones
and or landlines.

When the MMR system was activated to activated when we received Katrina
evacuee's,  our MMRS chair person later told me when she saw the hams arrive at
the shelter, a weight came off her shoulders.   She knew she would have
communications.    The Red Cross person couldn't figure out why we were there as
they had communications.   That was until her cell phone didn't work in side the
shelter.

You can't force your served agency to use you for anything they don't want to.  
But doing what the ask and treating it like it is the most important thing you
will ever do, will go a long way towards them using you more and more.   The
question then is... will you be ready when they do ask?




---- Henry T Sahler III <n9nox@...> wrote:
> Hi All
> Again here the point is being missed communicating with a served agency in all
of these other activities, which are non-emergency in nature, will make
communication in an emergency seem like every day, normal, (I hate to say it but
) routine stuff.  Because there is and are different stresses in these
activities, stress is stress and if one learns to control it when the chips are
not down, when they are its not a problem.
> Henry
> N9NOX / WQDB217
> RED #4813
> Pleasant Prairie WI.
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Ron Dodson
>   To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 3:43 PM
>   Subject: RE: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do
>
>
>
>   Joe Moell K0OV wrote: I disagree. With a little effort, hams COULD have
important jobs to
>   do on a week-to-week basis.
>
>
>
>
>
>   I agree. In Kentucky we have several groups who assist regular localized
activities.
>
>
>
>   In western Kentucky, we have one group who regularly assists local EMA with
checks on county storm warning devices (Sirens). They report on any which fail
to activate during regular scheduled tests.
>
>
>
>   Another northern Kentucky ARES group are called in on almost any lost person
search to support the law enforcement search efforts and yes, they are trained
in lost person search and in many cases a good deal of the members have even
taken search management training. Other groups work with local CitizenCorps
CERT’s and regional National Disaster Medical System (NDMS) and Metropolitan
Medical Response System (MMRS) activities while others work with regional
weapons of mass destruction/ haz-mat/ bio response teams that our state homeland
security operate. One south central Ky group performs “Highway Overpass
Watch” details assisting local law enforcement in preventing trouble at
interstate overpasses on events such as Halloween night. There is a world of
things one can do if you make the right connections and carry out requests
responsibly.
>
>
>
>   73,
>
>   Ron Dodson, KA4MAP
>
>   Former Ky SEC
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NRCEV@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
homingin73
>   Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:43 AM
>   To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com
>   Subject: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do
>
>
>
>   Doug wrote:
>   >That is a lack of a job to do. Fortunately
>   >communications emergencies are rare events.
>
>    There are potential clients that will use
>   us. It may be true that "all else fails" events are rare, but
>   communications disruptions do occur regularly. If hams are ready and
>   callout systems are in place, we can serve agencies in these
>   emergencies, getting valuable on-the-job training and developing
>   excellent rapport with agency leaders.
>
>   Take a look at www.hdscs.org
>
>   This ARES group has never had an "all else fails" disaster, but in 25
>   years it has responded almost 100 times to provide valuable service
>   when hospital patients' lives were at risk due to comms interruptions.
>   Ask any hospital disaster planner or Emergency Medical Services
>   Agency person in Orange County about ham radio and they will have
>   plenty of good things to say because of this continuous level of
>   preparedness and service.
>
>   That brings me to my beef with ARRL leadership -- it has been too
>   focused on "all else fails" Katrina-like disasters and has not paid
>   enough attention to hams' providing valuable support in the "little"
>   emergencies that will cement our bonds with agencies and get us ready
>   for the really big events.
>
>   73,
>   Joe Moell K0OV
>   Assistant Coordinator, HDSCS
>
>
>
>
>   Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>   Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>   Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007
2:03 PM
>
>
>
>
>   Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>   Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>   Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007
2:03 PM
>
>
>
>

N4AOF wrote:

To the extent that the ham radio organizations are actually involved in
serving these agencies, it would represent good PRACTICE for emergency
communications.  Unfortunately my observation has generally been that
ham
radio involvement with such agencies is mostly just on paper.  "The
Plan"
includes ham radio support -- but the agencies rarely drill the plan and

when they do the ham radio support is either not played or is played
separately from the agency activities.  Instead of reinforcing a close
working relationship between ham radio and the Served Agency, all too
often
such drills reinforce the mistaken concept that Emergency Communications

consists of hams-talking-to-other-hams.

==========================================

Sorry you missed the big region 5 exercise put on by Ky Office of
Homeland Security on April 19th Tom! Amateur radio absolutely ran the
show in the ice storm scenario. All EOC's activated as did a
Multi-Agency Coordination Center or MACC. Several mobile command
vehicles came into service such as the one owned by the regional
WMD/Haz-Mat/ Bio response team which was designed and built by hams. It
carries everything from public safety and sat phone communications to
amateur radio, fax and satellite internet connection. Several hospitals
also had amateur radio activated in their facility command centers.
Communications were conducted by better than 90% amateur radio personnel
on all the frequencies and modes used. Aside from handling real world
events during the exercise, the E-911 Centers stayed clear out of it and
let the hams do the job.

As a side note, amateur radio operators in Ky Region five have never had
a full blown Katrina sized response, ever. Aside from community and
regional exercises and real SkyWarn weather nets in severe weather
operations, these folks have had little chance at anything huge. One
county's hams, in the past notorious for not getting involved regularly,
even put on a good show and have decided to get more involved on a
regular basis now.

End result: Facilities and governments very impressed and many even
going to the trouble to allow (even to purchase!) fixed amateur radio
gear where none ever permanently was before. Mission accomplished. Just
being involved at any level can and will help make a difference.

We as amateur radio operators don't need a "disaster of the week", just
people who stay in the loop.

73,
Ron Dodson, KA4MAP
Former SEC Ky


-----Original Message-----
From: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NRCEV@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
N4AOF
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:16 PM
To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Dodson
Subject: RE: [NRCEV] We DO have jobs to do

> Joe Moell K0OV wrote:
>> I disagree. With a little effort, hams COULD have important jobs to
>> do on a week-to-week basis.
>
> I agree. In Kentucky we have several groups who assist regular
> localized activities.

But NOT Emergency Communications -- the difference between Emergency
Communications versus all these other kinds of Public Service
communications
is the key to the original discussion

> In western Kentucky, we have one group who regularly
> assists local EMA with checks on county storm warning
> devices (Sirens). They report on any which fail to activate
> during regular scheduled tests.

Scheduled siren tests bear no resembelence to emergency communications

This is a valuable service to the community.

Even more than just a valuable service to the community, it is
especially
important in that it maintains an on-going working relationship between
local hams and the EMA.

But it isn't Emergency Communications....
It isn't even practice for Emergency Communications

Again I am in no way disparaging the value of such service both the the
community and to ham radio.

> Another northern Kentucky ARES group are
> called in on almost any lost person search to
> support the law enforcement search efforts and
> yes, they are trained in lost person search and
> in many cases a good deal of the members have
> even taken search management training.

Now THIS may be Emergency Communications, or at least good practice for
Emergency Communications -- IF the hams are called to provide
communications
for the search rather than simply being a good source of ready manpower
for
the search.

Again (either way) it is a valuable service to the community.

And again (either way) it is important in that it maintains an on-going
working relationship between local hams and their local emergency
services
agencies.

> Other groups work with local CitizenCorps CERT’s

I'll pass on this one, because the role of emergency communicators in
CERT
is a potentially controversial issue.

> and regional National Disaster Medical System (NDMS)

Actually working with NDMS could involve emergency communications under
some
circumstances.  But there are two realities which go against including
NDMS
as an example of routine callouts of hams for emergency communications
work:
1. NDMS hardly ever gets called out at all (and hardly ever runs serious

drills)
2. In the rare instances where NDMS would be used, by definition, it
would
not involve emergency communications, because NDMS is activated in an
unaffected area to receive casualties coming from a disaster or other
mass
casualty event.

> and Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS) activities
> while others work with regional weapons of mass destruction/
> haz-mat/ bio response teams that our state homeland security
> operate.

To the extent that the ham radio organizations are actually involved in
serving these agencies, it would represent good PRACTICE for emergency
communications.  Unfortunately my observation has generally been that
ham
radio involvement with such agencies is mostly just on paper.  "The
Plan"
includes ham radio support -- but the agencies rarely drill the plan and

when they do the ham radio support is either not played or is played
separately from the agency activities.  Instead of reinforcing a close
working relationship between ham radio and the Served Agency, all too
often
such drills reinforce the mistaken concept that Emergency Communications

consists of hams-talking-to-other-hams.

> One south central Ky group performs “Highway Overpass
> Watch” details assisting local law enforcement in preventing
> trouble at interstate overpasses on events such as Halloween
> night.

Copy and Paste my comments about the Siren Tests here.  ;-)

> There is a world of things one can do if you make the
> right connections and carry out requests responsibly.

ABSOLUTELY TRUE -- and both the contacts and the "things one can do" are

important -- but the are not emergency communications.

The original point someone made was that Emergency Communications is
different from routine "emergency" services like Fire, Police, and EMS;
and
that point is also absolutely true.   There are "lots of things one can
do"
on a regular basis, but emergency communications simply is not one of
those
things.

73 de N4AOF





http://www.nrcev.org
Yahoo! Groups Links




Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007
2:03 PM


Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007
2:03 PM