Amateur radio support to CAP missions?

[wuzafuzz]

There have been a few ideas tossed around in this thread, but for the most part it has turned into a contest on two issues:

• HF vs VHF
• We don't want or need help from hams

If the revised 100-1 retains the provision for using amateur radio operators found in the draft version, I will pursue the matter  within my group and wing.  If allowed I will make contacts with amateur radio groups to see if we can establish a beneficial relationship.

I'll let you all know how it works out.

[Dirtman]

wuzafuzz

I say go for it.  Heck, it cant hurt anything, make your unit more prepared and perhaps teach your members something new and recruit new members.  Please keep us posted.  75% of the seniors in my unit are Hams.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out. 

One question I still have though:  Has/will the MOU between CAP and ARRL been updated to reflect this proposed change?

[JoeTomasone]

One question I still have though:  Has/will the MOU between CAP and ARRL been updated to reflect this proposed change?

You don't change an active document to reflect what may become an active document. 

And nothing in either world is that fast.

[Dirtman]

yes Joe, I know that you don't change an active document.  Note the Has/will in the question.  More on the will than the has. 

I also wonder if the ARRL was consulted on this, of if they even know about it.

Again, I say go for it.......................................

[Dirtman]

Had a free minute to read the proposed changes, not just glance at them...........

11-2., With specific regard to item (b), that's an unsupported claim.  Red Cross, Salvation Army, Baptist Relief, RACES organizations - all are covered by various forms of insurance and/or workmen's comp.  That does not constitute a 'pecuniary interest' such that the FCC finds that it would or should prohibit those folks from use of amateur radio communications during disaster relief operations (i.e., in a 'real' emergency).  The FCC was asked to rule on such cases ("Cardillo-Lee" petition) and determined that there was no need for a ruling, since the case was already covered by existing rules.  Refer to http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/1999/12/02/3/   wherein it is stated, towit:

"In denying the Cardillo-Lee petition, the FCC basically said a change in the rules was not required, in part because of amendments it made in 1993 regarding prohibited transmissions. The FCC said the requested clarification was unnecessary "because these two-way communications are permitted within the existing rules." The FCC said hams who also are emergency personnel engaged in disaster relief "do not appear to be receiving compensation for transmitting communications." The FCC said it views the Amateur Radio operation in such situations as incidental to the individual's primary disaster-relief duties." (emphasis added)