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