kc4raf: there are times when we perform ares or Cert stuff when transmitting for the agency we are supporting that confidential matters pertaining to minors or health and welfare, they are agency normal requirements that require this.
That sounds like an issue with the agency you are working for, as others have said.
Names and health information can be transmitted in the clear without violating HIPAA rules. Sounds like there may be some confusion over this.
While it's nice that your group is trying to keep things private, amateur radio isn't the place for private conversations.
The agency that is asking you to handle this sort of traffic over amateur radio apparently isn't too aware of what the rules are. If they are requesting you use encryption on amateur radio frequencies, whoever is running your group needs to explain the rules to them.
When we do car rally support, if an accident involving injuries to a driver, no driver names are to be transmitted over the net at any time.
Again, not a requirement under HIPAA rules. If your group has made this part of their SOP, and they don't have a proper solution, then they need to take a closer look at this.
We are forced to use cell phone which requires net to handle two methods of comms. The radio and a cell phone at sometimes the same time.
Handling two forms of communications at the same time should be a requirement of any network control person. If they are understaffed, that's something that needs to be addressed.
A cell phone is an excellent resource if privacy is your concern. Asking amateur radio rules to be changed to support an agency that is expecting hams to provide emergency communications, isn't.
Many police agencies will use cell phones for handling sensitive traffic. I don't understand why amateur radio rules need to be changed?
Sure other hams can listen in, though to be 100% sure, they would have to carry 5 radios. True there are a few hams that report in who carry 4 or 5 radios. Agencies who see this , they refere to those volunteers as "Billy Blue Lights".
AKA: Whackers, Ricky Rescue, Wannabe, etc. Anyone trying to listen to 5 radios and expecting to be effective is probably not doing a very good job. Some professional 911 dispatchers can do it, but not reliably. Usually one or two radios are"select" and at a higher volume with the rest "unselect" and at a lower volume. Rarely are they expected to actually be handling traffic reliably on more than one or two channels at a time.
The FCC has not been moved to accept these arguments by others yet. In a net operations, a channel can be preset with whatever the encryption scheme would be, and the general public would not be able to listen in.
And moved they probably shouldn't be. This isn't the purpose of amateur radio.
This would satisfy most agencies that are being supported.
Someone (maybe you?) need to manage their expectations. Amateur radio doesn't allow encryption. Expecting the FCC to change the rules so a public safety agency can utilize amateur radio for their operations gets into the slippery slope area.
If encryption is allowed on amateur radio, then what's to keep anyone from doing it, license or not? The beauty of amateur radio is everyone can participate and communications are truly open. Common platform/standards are what's needed. What is getting public safety agencies into trouble is complex communications systems that are difficult to manage on the fly. Unfortunately amateur radio operators are falling into this also. There's no common digital standard for amateur use, very little coordination, and getting encryption keys out to a bunch of volunteers is going to likely blow any reality of privacy.
Also, expecting amateur radio operators to spend money on new radios that will support encryption probably won't go very well. In this day and age many amateurs are quite content with their $25 Chinese radio. Getting some new hams to buy a new commercial radio with higher end features is going to be hard to do. If the club/agency is going to fund the new radios, they'd be better off using Part 90 frequencies where encryption is perfectly legal.
I am not trying to get in an argumen
I hear you, and please don't take my comments as an argument. Only providing an alternate point of view to consider.
... as confidential comms have been presented to the FCC many times before and deaf ears have maybe listened.
I wouldn't necessarily assume those ears were deaf. Just because some didn't agree with the ruling doesn't mean the ruling was wrong. FCC may be trying to keep amateur radio connected to it's roots. Trying to expand it into an extension of public safety radio systems would lead to a bunch of issues that amateurs probably don't realize. And, in reality, it isn't needed. HIPAA rules don't require it, and public safety agencies shouldn't be expecting it.
Hams have offered services that agencies could not provide for many years. First we had repeaters, agencies were in many areas just simplex . Repeaters gave them greater and clearer comms., Then we offered auto patch, or phone contact before there were cell phones. This was helpful for those who had needs to talk to others whop were not radio savey. , Then we offered slow scan tv, or the providing of images, which was a great benefits. Pictures of a scene were for more descriptive than words said. We had repeater linking, providing wider area comms. Agencies now have repeaters, cell phones that carry voice and pictures, trunking that offers wider coverage or in some states state wide comms. We have adapted DMR , but no encryption and now they have encrypted comms while we as hams sit on the side.
How do you mean "sit on the side"? Amateur radio operators are not public safety professionals. They are hobbyists. A 70% passing score on a 35 question multiple choice test and a <$100 Chinese radio doesn't make someone a public safety professional. Amateur radio operators are communicators, that's it.
And public safety radio systems have expanded well beyond DMR level features. Public safety radio systems have left most amateur systems in the dust, and that happened a decade or more ago. When FirstNet hits the streets, the differences are going to be even more profound.
Agencies have passed us by, and if we can not provide what they are used too, I feel we are of less or no use at all.
The truth is most public safety agencies don't "need" amateur radio to do their job. The days of amateur radio operators being the only source of reliable communications in a disaster are mostly gone. While amateur radio does have it's place, it's a lot different than it was back in the days of Civil Defense. Public safety communications really changed a lot after 9/11. DHS took care of that when they rolled out nationwide interoperability frequencies. That allows agencies that were smart enough to program their radios correctly to communicate in simplex mode with other agencies as needed. Add in satellite communications, cell phones, FirstNet and all the others, and the need for volunteers with radios is greatly diminished.
I've worked for the same agency for 20+ years and we've never needed amateur radio operators to fill our communications needs. That has included earthquakes, "year 2000", power outages, storms, fiber optic cable cuts, etc. Systems are a lot more robust than they were a few decades ago.
In a way, amateur radio taught public safety too well. Amateurs did such a good job that they've put themselves out of "work". That should be seen as a good thing, not an issue.
Its like we have the guns, but the ammo is nor provided.
Probably not a good example, but I get what you mean.
This was like the time in Viet Nam. We knew the targets, but Washington told us what targets we could go after. Sometimes it as like , well in Indians didn't have bows and arrows anymore, they had guns that shot pretty darm good, and we had blinders on. Washington at their finest once more.
Again, I'd have to disagree. Even public safety agencies are learning their lessons about encryption. When many went to trunked radio systems with subscriber access control, they effectively locked out mutual aid help from other agencies. Public safety learned from that.
DHS has spoken out against encryption in many cases, and makes it plain in the IFOG that encryption shall not be used on interoperability channels. Again, a sign that public safety, DHS and FCC learned something that some amateurs have not.
Technology will always be changing, and prices will always be coming down. Thanks to that, and grant money, most agencies have the equipment and systems they need to communicate. Not all, though. Little local agencies, volunteer fire departments, etc. are all still hurting, but that's not because of lack of encryption. Its because the bureaucrats in charge are screwing the pooch when it comes to communications systems. The feds are working towards fixing that, bureaucrats be damned.
What I see is that amateur radio needs to reinvent itself into filling real world needs. Not chasing a train that left the station decades ago.
Amateur radio needs to expand. Get out of the "when all else fails" mindset and stop planning for the zombie apocalypse. Develop a standard digital mode that will allow the hobby radio industry to move on. Get into wide bandwidth use for carrying data, live stream video, etc. Narrow bandwidth voice communications is 1970's technology. Time for the amateurs to get out in front and start developing things. Time to stop getting hung up on the "I'm licensed, you aren't" attitude.