On 1/24/2013 1:58 PM, Tom Horne wrote:
Jerry

It seems I have a reel talent for being unclear in how I ask questions.
I wish that I could turn that into a job skill like the people who
right crossword puzzles but I digress. When I said Ad Hoc EOCs I was
referring to the ones in the city halls of the existing small cities in
the county. They don't have dedicated spaces for an EOC but they set
one up in a meeting or conference room when they have something serious
going down. The idea would be to set up a few wifi capable links on
taller buildings that could be linked to some central high spot and from
there to the county's purpose built EOC.

Prince Georges county ARES is looking at installing a High Speed Multi
Media Mesh (HSMM-MESHâ„¢) Net between their county's hospitals. We have
Used HSMM-Mesh at one public service event already and it worked well
there. So those of us who have already deployed it successfully in a
field deployed application were interested in seeing if it could be used
to cover these longer distances effectively. If it were possible to run
Web EOC on the links that would be sufficient. We are not trying to
restore Facebook connectivity to the people at Temporary shelter
locations but rather to put some readily predictable places in touch
with the EOC. Since that could be done with automatic control under
part 97 of the rules we would not need an operator at the served
locations.

As for testing we could put LAN routers at one or more of the nodes to
allow appropriate local use of the WAN the links would provide which
would provide the kind of continuous use and testing that you are
talking about. We would have to have a way to shut down the LAN routers
when the links were needed for emergency management support.

--
Tom W3TDH


Tom,

Yes, I understood what you meant when you talked about "ad hoc EOC's".
But why do you think they are "ad hoc"? Perhaps because they don't have
the room for an EOC - which also means they don't have room for the
equipment. That's why hams bring equipment into these ad hoc EOC's.

As for the mesh network between hospitals. You need to be careful. For
instance, NO medical information can be transmitted in the clear (HIPAA
regulations have severe penalties for doing so) - which eliminates ham
radio for transmitting this information (encryption not allowed).

As for "automatic control" - this refers to control for licensed amateur
stations. It does NOT include allowing unlicensed operators to control
ham transmitters. You will still need a control operator to key the
transmitter - which means either someone on site or someone who can
otherwise tell when the transmitter needs to be keyed.

I have to agree with Fred here. If you want to promote such a system,
you should be looking at commercial technology.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

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

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 20:36:49 EST, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

As for "automatic control" - this refers to control for licensed amateur
stations. It does NOT include allowing unlicensed operators to control
ham transmitters. You will still need a control operator to key the
transmitter - which means either someone on site or someone who can
otherwise tell when the transmitter needs to be keyed.

A non-ham can key (or the digital equivalent) a ham transmitter as
long as the control operator is "on duty and in control" to borrow, a
phrase from the radio broadcast services rules. We interpret that to
mean "in the room and aware of what's happening".

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

In article ,
Jerry Stuckle wrote:


As for the mesh network between hospitals. You need to be careful. For
instance, NO medical information can be transmitted in the clear (HIPAA
regulations have severe penalties for doing so) - which eliminates ham
radio for transmitting this information (encryption not allowed).


Whoa, that is an ultra Broad Statement, and not supported by Part 97
Rules. There was published a very compelling White Paper on Part 97
Encryption Policy last Fall, that has generated some interest. I sent a
copy to a few "Friends" at FCC HQ, from the Old Days, and got some very
interesting replies, that though UnOfficial, tend to lead me to believe
that the White Paper is Spot On.... Maybe Phil, could expound on the
issue, a bit more as He was, is, a Comms Lawyer, previously with the
Commission. What say Phil, would you like to climb out on this limb?

--
Bruce in Alaska add path before the @ for email

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 13:52:20 EST, Bruce Gordon
wrote:

Maybe Phil, could expound on the
issue, a bit more as He was, is, a Comms Lawyer, previously with the
Commission. What say Phil, would you like to climb out on this limb?

Stand by on that.....

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

On 1/27/2013 1:52 PM, Bruce Gordon wrote:
In article ,
Jerry Stuckle wrote:


As for the mesh network between hospitals. You need to be careful. For
instance, NO medical information can be transmitted in the clear (HIPAA
regulations have severe penalties for doing so) - which eliminates ham
radio for transmitting this information (encryption not allowed).


Whoa, that is an ultra Broad Statement, and not supported by Part 97
Rules. There was published a very compelling White Paper on Part 97
Encryption Policy last Fall, that has generated some interest. I sent a
copy to a few "Friends" at FCC HQ, from the Old Days, and got some very
interesting replies, that though UnOfficial, tend to lead me to believe
that the White Paper is Spot On.... Maybe Phil, could expound on the
issue, a bit more as He was, is, a Comms Lawyer, previously with the
Commission. What say Phil, would you like to climb out on this limb?


FCC Rules, Part 97.113 (Prohibited Transmissions)):

(4) Music using a phone emission except as specifically provided
elsewhere in this section; communications intended to facilitate a
criminal act; messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their
meaning, except as otherwise provided herein; obscene or indecent words
or language; or false or deceptive messages, signals or identification.

There is no exception for transmission of medical or emergency data.

Doesn't seem that it could be any clearer.

White papers don't override the rules and regs.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

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

On 1/27/2013 1:38 PM, Phil Kane wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 20:36:49 EST, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

As for "automatic control" - this refers to control for licensed amateur
stations. It does NOT include allowing unlicensed operators to control
ham transmitters. You will still need a control operator to key the
transmitter - which means either someone on site or someone who can
otherwise tell when the transmitter needs to be keyed.

A non-ham can key (or the digital equivalent) a ham transmitter as
long as the control operator is "on duty and in control" to borrow, a
phrase from the radio broadcast services rules. We interpret that to
mean "in the room and aware of what's happening".

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel


Sorry, Phil, but what you interpret doesn't count. It's what the FCC
interprets. However, I do agree with you that AS LONG AS A LICENSED HAM
IS IN CONTROL. This can mean "in the room and aware of what's
happening", as long as he can terminate the transmission (i.e. pull the
power switch).

Plus, if you were to read the whole thread, the comment was that there
would not have to be a ham at the location - which does match your
interpretation.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

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

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:14:35 EST, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

There is no exception for transmission of medical or emergency data.

Doesn't seem that it could be any clearer.

White papers don't override the rules and regs.

"White papers" when issued by the FCC explain how they intend to
apply/interpret/enforce the rules, and are persuasive authority in
cases of litigation thereof. Sometimes they make it easier, sometimes
they make it more stringent than "black letter" rules. We use a ton
of those in procedural cases of waiver requests.

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

On 1/27/2013 7:14 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
There is no exception for transmission of medical or emergency data.

http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/faq/safeguards/197.html

Specifically:
For example, the Privacy Rule does not require the following types
of structural or systems changes:

Encryption of wireless or other emergency medical radio communications
which can be intercepted by scanners.

Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:14:50 EST, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

A non-ham can key (or the digital equivalent) a ham transmitter as
long as the control operator is "on duty and in control" to borrow, a
phrase from the radio broadcast services rules. We interpret that to
mean "in the room and aware of what's happening".

Sorry, Phil, but what you interpret doesn't count. It's what the FCC
interprets.

Sorry, Jerry, my error. I should have said "what the FCC has ruled
and expects those of us in the communications legal community to
spread the word when necessary". Quite often FCC rule interpretations
are buried in case decisions and advice letters.

Then again, when I was on the enforcement staff of the FCC I was one
of the people who helped formulate that specific interpretation so I
do have a "we" investment.

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

On 1/28/2013 1:15 AM, Phil Kane wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:14:50 EST, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

A non-ham can key (or the digital equivalent) a ham transmitter as
long as the control operator is "on duty and in control" to borrow, a
phrase from the radio broadcast services rules. We interpret that to
mean "in the room and aware of what's happening".

Sorry, Phil, but what you interpret doesn't count. It's what the FCC
interprets.

Sorry, Jerry, my error. I should have said "what the FCC has ruled
and expects those of us in the communications legal community to
spread the word when necessary". Quite often FCC rule interpretations
are buried in case decisions and advice letters.

Then again, when I was on the enforcement staff of the FCC I was one
of the people who helped formulate that specific interpretation so I
do have a "we" investment.

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel


Phil,

A white paper is not the law. For Amateurs, that is Part 97.

Your interpretation is pretty meaningless. That may be how you think
the FCC is going to enforce the law today - but that's only for today.
A change in FCC staff, administration, etc. can (and in the government,
often does) change that. Heck - even pressure from Congress or other
agencies like the TSA can change that. It's happened with other
agencies all too often.

The only rules that count are Part 97.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

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