"N9OGL" wrote


"You must never accept any money or other consideration for operating
your station [97.113(a)(2)]. this is consistent with one of the prime
directives of our serice:


I understand your concern, but the grant does not provide payment for operating;
it provides reimbursement for expenses.

The distinction isn't all that subtle --- consider this: If the government gave
you a plane ticket, lodged you in a hotel, and provided your meals so you could
operate a station in the disaster area, would you consider this "compensation"?
In this case, rather than provide those items "in kind", the government has made
a grant which covers exactly those same expenses after the fact.

I personally wish the money was spent on grants to actual victims, but I can't
find anyone being paid "any money or other consideration for operating".

73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"N9OGL" wrote


"You must never accept any money or other consideration for operating
your station [97.113(a)(2)]. this is consistent with one of the prime
directives of our serice:


I understand your concern, but the grant does not provide payment for ope=
rating;
it provides reimbursement for expenses.

but you cut the perant paragraph Hans being re qutoed below

97.113(a)(2)] This includes direct payment (money, goods, food, and so
on) and indirect payment (publicity, advertising, and so on)."



The distinction isn't all that subtle --- consider this: If the governme=
nt gave
you a plane ticket, lodged you in a hotel, and provided your meals so you=
could
operate a station in the disaster area, would you consider this "compensa=
tion"?
In this case, rather than provide those items "in kind", the government h=
as made
a grant which covers exactly those same expenses after the fact.

based on what has been published by the ARRL for years yes I would say
it was compensation. I have never thought that type of rule was proper,
but I have and do feel that those are the rules

I personally wish the money was spent on grants to actual victims, but I =
can't
find anyone being paid "any money or other consideration for operating".
=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"N9OGL" wrote

"You must never accept any money or other consideration for operating
your station [97.113(a)(2)]. this is consistent with one of the prime
directives of our serice:

I understand your concern, but the grant does not provide payment for ope=
rating;
it provides reimbursement for expenses.

My radios are expenses.

wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"N9OGL" wrote

"You must never accept any money or other consideration for operating
your station [97.113(a)(2)]. this is consistent with one of the prime
directives of our serice:

I understand your concern, but the grant does not provide payment for o=
perating;
it provides reimbursement for expenses.

My radios are expenses.

as are My drill bits For punching hole in the walls

A Better set of rules would allow some reasonable comp, and I would
support it but that isn't the rules NOW

an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"N9OGL" wrote

"You must never accept any money or other consideration for operati=
ng
your station [97.113(a)(2)]. this is consistent with one of the pri=
me
directives of our serice:

I understand your concern, but the grant does not provide payment for=
operating;
it provides reimbursement for expenses.

My radios are expenses.

as are My drill bits For punching hole in the walls

A Better set of rules would allow some reasonable comp, and I would
support it but that isn't the rules NOW

People have been paying to have their 2M and 440 transmissions repeated
for years, and all the OFs here are good with it. None are asking for
a rules change.

wrote:
KØHB wrote:

"N9OGL" wrote


"You must never accept any money or other consideration for operating
your station [97.113(a)(2)]. this is consistent with one of the prime
directives of our serice:

I understand your concern, but the grant does not provide payment for operating;
it provides reimbursement for expenses.


My radios are expenses.


You might be able to make a case for that if you purchased them for
emergency use, and only used them for Emergency use.

Expect a challenge, tho'

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:

"N9OGL" wrote


"You must never accept any money or other consideration for operating
your station [97.113(a)(2)]. this is consistent with one of the prime
directives of our serice:

I understand your concern, but the grant does not provide payment for o=
perating;
it provides reimbursement for expenses.


My radios are expenses.


You might be able to make a case for that if you purchased them for
emergency use, and only used them for Emergency use.

Expect a challenge, tho'
=20
- Mike KB3EIA -

As if I'd use them any other time.