Personal locator beacons

Started by Flying Pig, June 04, 2008, 03:58:28 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sardak

QuoteHow are PLB's not a responsibility of the AF?  Congress has given the AF responsibility for "Inland SAR" not just "Inland SAR for missing airplanes."
These are from the comments filed by HQ ACC with the FCC on the PLB issue. Copies attached.
2000 The issue of PLBs, by their very nature, relates to Missing Person incidents. Based on the Memorandum of Agreement we have with the Governor of each state, these incidents are the responsibility of the local sheriff or state emergency management agency. PLB alert messages, therefore, should be sent directly to the state or local agency responsible for missing person searches. The AFRCC should not receive or prosecute PLB alerts; such action would violate all 48-state agreements.
2002 Because of these Agreements [with the states], the actual responsibility to respond to Personal Locator Beacon (PLB) alerts belongs with the responsible agencies of each state. As such, the AFRCC concurs with the FCC...with the following stipulations:
The coordination date [1 July 2003] will allow for the transfer of SARSAT PLB information directly from NOAA to the responsible state agencies.


AFRCC is losing the battle over alerting, but the war continues. In the MOUs and MOAs between AFRCC and a number of states, PLB alerts are received by AFRCC and sent to the state SAR agency, not CAP. Some agreements date back to the mid 1990's when PLBs were tried on an experimental basis, so the AFRCC position is nothing new.  AFRCC continues to try to get out of the PLB alert business. Once again, at this year's state SAR coordinators meeting, AFRCC showed a proposed plan on how PLB alerts would go directly to the state agencies without AFRCC involvement.

QuoteThis means that if a PLB is going off and someone wants air assets to help with the search, I don't see how the AF can say "No."
They can, but if a state agency requests CAP assistance, AFRCC will provide it.

As for the National Park Service and ESF-9, one has to read the whole document:
- DOI/NPS serves as the primary agency for ESF #9 during inland, backcountry, remote area SAR operations in incidents requiring a coordinated Federal response.
- For incidents in which it is the primary agency, DOI/NPS:
Serves as headquarters-level ESF #9 coordinator during inland, backcountry, remote area SAR operations
when State, tribal, and local SAR resources have been exhausted.

Neither of these apply to normal SAR events including PLB alerts.  NPS has no interest in taking this away from AFRCC, although AFRCC, as shown, has no interest in PLB alerting.

The state SAR coordinators were told that the National SAR Committee (NSARC), which includes NPS, is rewriting ESF-9, which NSARC says is a mess.  This is being coordinated with the writing of a new National SAR Manual.

Mike

isuhawkeye

I could not have said it better my self  :clap:

JohnKachenmeister

Quote from: RiverAux on July 05, 2008, 12:15:12 AM
The AFRCC has no more responsibility for individuals activating PLBs than they do if my friend's two year old wanders away from home.   Beyond tracking the signal and reporting it to the state, they don't have any more authority in the matter.  Their job is to coordinate federal response to inland SAR.  Hence why we're having to do more and more of our local SAR missions as corporate missions. 


If your friend's 2-year old wanders away from home, an air search may not be the best option.  If your friend's 2-year old wanders away from a wilderness campground, and an air search is requested, the AFRCC I am pretty sure is required to provide it.  They will provide it by alerting the CAP Wing in that area.

Didn't that exact same scenario happen in NC a few months ago?  The toddler wandered off, and the aircrew spotted the kid's dog and sent in ground teams?  The kid was found safe, as I recall.
Another former CAP officer

RiverAux

John, the lost kid in the campground is not a federal responsibility.  The feds may decide to assist, but it isn't their job.  Specificlly, with CAP in regards to lost person searches sometimes the AFRCC approves it as an AFAM and sometimes denies AFAM status.  There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to which way the ball bounces in any given day.  In the last year my state has had lost person searches as corporate and AFAM.