5,022
edits
2023-2024 NET Program Realignment: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
2023-2024 NET Program Realignment (view source)
Revision as of 14:40, 15 November 2023
, 15 November 2023→Q&A from NET Volunteers
| Line 228: | Line 228: | ||
===== Q: If this NERF plan is adopted, how do we tell our neighborhood that we are no longer going to be their first responders? ===== | ===== Q: If this NERF plan is adopted, how do we tell our neighborhood that we are no longer going to be their first responders? ===== | ||
(Since teams may cover a smaller area) | ''(Since teams may cover a smaller area)'' | ||
'''A:''' This proposal '''does not''' require that a person leading a NERF be an active NET volunteer. They do not need to be. As a non-NET, they can contact PBEM and say they're starting their own NERF. PBEM will support it. They will have access to the curricula, since it will all be published online. | '''A:''' This proposal '''does not''' require that a person leading a NERF be an active NET volunteer. They do not need to be. As a non-NET, they can contact PBEM and say they're starting their own NERF. PBEM will support it. They will have access to the curricula, since it will all be published online. | ||
| Line 235: | Line 235: | ||
'''A:''' I cannot emphasize enough that a NERF is designed to accept participation from non-NET volunteers. The ''majority'' of individuals in a NERF will be non-NETs. You don't need NETs to have a NERF; you don't even need a NET volunteer to lead one. | '''A:''' I cannot emphasize enough that a NERF is designed to accept participation from non-NET volunteers. The ''majority'' of individuals in a NERF will be non-NETs. You don't need NETs to have a NERF; you don't even need a NET volunteer to lead one. | ||
===== Q: One of the benefits(?) of NA service areas was that comms to PBEM went through the team’s ARO. | ===== Q: Would NERFs work towards having their own ARO (and thereby increase ECC radio traffic)? ===== | ||
''One of the benefits(?) of NA service areas was that comms to PBEM went through the team’s ARO. …or lean harder on BEECNs or decide on their own?'' | |||
'''A:''' We don't have a solid plan for this yet. A solution might look like an intervening level of radio comms that kicks up from NERF level to Neighborhood Coalition level or the fire station or fire battalion level. On the other hand, I would say, we don't really have a solid answer to this '''''now''''', either. In the aftermath of an earthquake, the ECC will not receive ANY radio traffic except scene stabilization and life safety traffic. Even '''''that''''' won't reach the ECC for up to 24 hours after an earthquake because it will take about that long to activate the ECC radio room. | |||
So if anything, this proposal puts neighborhoods in a neutral comms situation compared to now. If a NERF has an ARO and needs to send scene stabilization/life safety traffic to the ECC, nothing will stop them from doing that. If the traffic doesn't meet that level, the ECC doesn't want it. Non-NERFs can use the BEECN system to communicate that level of traffic, because that level and urgency of traffic is the only traffic we'll accept from BEECN, as well. | |||
Days following the immediate aftermath, the expectation is that NERFs use the [[Damage Assessment Mapping Module|DAMM]] to communicate with the ECC once some kind of cell service is restored. | |||
===== Q: How do you envision NETs and fire stations working together under this model? ===== | |||
'''A: No real changes.''' The point for a fire station and NETs to know each other is to facilitate working together in the field after an earthquake. PBEM would work with PF&R to create a program where Fire Captains know who the NERF leaders in their Fire Management Areas are. It would be to the discretion of the Captain and their officers to work with the local volunteers. This is no different than what we do now. | |||
===== Q: Can a NET volunteer associate with more than one NERF, such as a federation of NERFs? ===== | |||
'''A:''' I can't see any reason why not. Although, I'm not sure why someone would want to since Service Areas will not overlap. | |||
===== Q: The NERF model appears not to have any role for a NET who does not want to take on the leadership task of organizing a NERF(?) ===== | |||
'''A:''' That is not correct. Under this proposal, NET volunteers can still participate as NETs in centralized deployments, as BEECN volunteers, and in training. If the question is about NERFs ''specifically'', it is true that someone has to lead the effort in a neighborhood for it to work. But that person doesn't necessarily have to be a certified NET volunteer. | |||
===== Q: Is there a model that you are basing this on that we can look at/learn about to see how the implementation went? ===== | |||
'''A:''' No, these proposals are not based on a model from elsewhere. No identification with other programs (living or deceased), places, buildings, and products is intended or should be inferred. | |||
===== Q: How does this model overlap with powerline and other non-earthquake deployments? ===== | |||
A: That's what the centralized deployments are for (see above). | |||
== Notes and References == | == Notes and References == | ||