[MRIC] Reasons to exist

[Bob Long]

We were told the reasons why we exist were included int the following 
paragraph.  If the bold portion of this charge is not supported by the 
managers, then why are the meetings being called?  It appears that 
despite unanimous support this support is not present anymore.  Am I 
wrong?  Are we still to develop a format for the messages or are they to 
be dictated to us.  I am not saying that what I proposed is what has to 
be accepted, but it was the RACES operators that objected to the format 
and felt that it caused difficulty in doing our jobs.  Compromise is a 
two way street. 

The ICS-213 was developed originally to be a document transfered by 
"runners" not by voice we are told.  Some of our operators seem to feel 
that it does not work well for them in a voice mode.   Where do we go 
from here?

Bob Long

EC/RO WASH

I am please to inform you of the creation of the Maryland RACES 
Interoperability Committee (MRIC). Last week, during the Maryland 
Emergency Management Association meeting, Ed Mullikin (Director, Talbot 
County Emergency Management), based on some recommendations from me, 
made a motion to the Association to create a committee to be made up of 
Maryland RACES Officers (ROs) to address technical issues of RACES 
interoperability such as coordinating simplex frequencies used by RACES, 
obtaining consensus on state-wide HF net frequencies,* standardizing the 
format of messages between jurisdictions*, proposing interoperability 
exercises, and resolving other technical interoperability issues between 
jurisdictions. The motion passed unanimously with Emergency Managers in 
all Maryland jurisdictions approving. The complete text of the motion is 
included at the bottom of this email.

_____________________

I just printed the form as presented at the first meeting and printed the
form that I just received from Al on 4/4/07.

I detect no changes!  So, what's the point of making suggestions?

It's starting to look like a rubber stamp operation.

Later,

Ray kb3fww

HARCO agrees completely with the Baltimore County RO on the use of the 
ICS-213.



I think that many of us have become so used to using and seeing the ARRL 
Radiogram for so many years that it might be hard to "break with 
tradition" and move onto something else.  Please remember, no one is 
doing away with the ARRL Radiogram.  An additional tool is being added 
to our bag of communicators tools that allows those we serve to have a 
"more user-friendly" format for a message form.  We do not create the 
messages, we simply pass them along accurately and in a timely manner.  
Remember, the ARRL Radiogram was developed for use in CW traffic 
handling and adapted to phone traffic handling by amateur radio 
operators for amateur radio operators.  The ICS-213 was developed for 
use by those who create the messages, not by those who handle them.  


Please keep that in mind.



We all must remain flexible in order to best serve those we serve!



73,

Pat Scolla, WB0EGR

Harford County RO & EC







Joe wrote:


> BaCo is okay with the modified form as presented during the initial MRIC
> meeting.
>
> We have been using the ICS-213 standard form with minor modifications (as
> developed with Harford County in 2005) for a over 18 months. Over the 
> last
> ten months we have used it during two county wide drills and three
> activations with no issues. We have clocked over 1500 man hours of proven
> use during exercises and activations. Our supported agencies (12) have 
> found
> that keeping the outgoing reply on the same form as the incoming actually
> improves efficiency, makes it easier for the responder to compose a reply
> and for archiving.
>
> We tried a radiogram/ICS-213 hybrid and found that word count, fixed 
> spaces
> and separate forms for message and reply leads to confusion. We don't 
> send
> messages word by word we send them phrase by phrase. During one of our
> county wide exercises supported agencies passed over 20 formal and 15
> tactical messages using the modified ICS-213 format within a span of
> forty-five minutes. Compare that to how long it takes and how few 
> messages
> are passed on a traffic net during any given session of the same 
> duration.
> Our personnel have used the form, it is used outside of RACES and it has
> been used under fire by federal agencies since 2000. A hybrid 
> ARRL/ICS-213
> format is not workable for BaCo.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> This email list is for the use of RACES Officers and Emergency 
> Managers. Only email related to the Maryland RACES Interoperabilty 
> Committee (MRIC) of the Maryland Emergency Management Association 
> should be sent to this email reflector list. All emails must be in 
> plain text format (no HTML).
> MRIC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mric
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmmain.htm
> Post: mailto:MRIC at mailman.qth.net
>
>
>