NASAR held their 31st International Search and Rescue Conference and Exhibition, "SAR 03," in Reno on May 28-31. Over 600 SAR professionals and volunteers attended and the mood was upbeat, though attendance was down a bit, which was attributed to the economy. In addition to the many excellent panels and seminars, this year saw the introduction of a Government Interface track on the session schedule with the emphasis on the upcoming introduction of PLBs (Personal Locator Beacons) into the inland SAR environment.

NASAR’s Hal Foss Award, its most prestigious, recognizes an individual or organization for significant contributions to Search and Rescue of a national scope. This year’s well-deserved winner was the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center. This seems especially appropriate this year. It was the recent new leadership of the AFRCC who had the courage to make a 180 degree shift, ending years of opposition to PLBs by that command, that helped to finally paved the way for legalization of PLBs in the U.S. Lieutenant Colonel Scott Morgan, commander of the AFRCC, instituted that about face. He accepted the award on behalf of all the men and women who man the AFRCC 24/7/365, "so others may live."

SAR 03 also saw the last official appearance in uniform of Lieutenant Commander Paul Steward, who retired from the U.S. Coast Guard after 24 years of service the Sunday following the close of the event. Paul accomplished a great deal for the SAR community in his last eight years working at Coast Guard headquarters. He became known unofficially as "Mr. PLB" for his extraordinary dogged determination and valiant efforts in working towards legalization of the beacons. He has always been a good friend to Equipped To Survive™ and we wish him well as he exchanges the military uniform for a business suit in the private sector. We’re glad that he will remain active within the SAR community as a civilian, where his knowledge, contacts and enthusiasm will continue to benefit us all.

The Personal Locator Beacon oriented sessions ("Rescue From Above – The COSPAS-SARSAT System," "On The Cutting Edge – The Latest Technology in the In-Land Environment," "What Do You Mean My 121.5 Beacon Won’t Work Anymore," "Can You Hear Me Now? PLBs vs. the Cell Phone Evaluation Results," "Help! Here I Am – Managing Personal Locator Beacons – A Panel Discussion" and "How Fast Do You Want To Rescued? – Registering Your 406 MHz Beacons") aimed to explain how the PLBs function, how the alert system operates and how the state and local SAR community would be integrated into the alert chain. The two most critical sessions, the first dealing with how the system operates and the extensive two-hour long panel discussion were well attended.

The panel discussion proved very useful and informative with a worthwhile exchange of ideas and concerns that will help all involved to better manage this introduction of new technology. The panel consisted of representatives from the AFRCC, EMS Technologies who make the SARMaster software that the AFRCC uses and that states will eventually get, Civil Air Patrol (CAP), State SAR Coordinators from Oregon, Washington and Vermont, early adopters and believers in PLBs, and representatives from ACR Electronics and McMurdo, the two largest PLB manufacturers.

In addition, in the audience and also participating were representatives from NOAA, Coast Guard, NASA, FCC and other PLB experts, including yours truly. LTC Scott Morgan moderated the discussion and opened the session with compliments to all who had played a role in bringing the PLB introduction to fruition, including some very nice words and recognition for Commander Steward and for Equipped To Survive.

All existing 121.5 MHz homing gear used by SAR will continue to work; all PLBs include a 121.5 homing signal. The superior location data from the 406 MHz PLBs will narrow the search area significantly allowing easier location using the 121.5 MHz homer than with previous technology beacons. Wider availability of 121.5 homing equipment should be encouraged for the added benefits it will now provide as more PLBs are fielded. An impromptu late afternoon field exercise using a number of ACR Electronics Vecta 2 direction finders introduced some participants to the modern locating equipment and how it works. CAP, who have specialized in searching for 121.5 MHz ELTs for years, indicated they stand ready to assist with both their equipment and personnel as well as by providing training for others.

User inability to correctly operate their GPS if attached to a PLB will not impact the location data derived from the external GPS. It takes default data and provides location only in latitude and longitude in standard degrees, minutes and seconds format. In addition, the Doppler location from the low earth orbiting (LEO) satellites provides a cross check, most likely before SAR resources can actually be dispatched to the location, or shortly after dispatching in the worse case. Local SAR resources using other standard mapping coordinate systems for SAR purposes will need to be able to translate the longitude and latitude coordinates, but this is a relatively trivial exercise.

For various reasons beyond anybody’s reasonable control, existing AFRCC funding for deployment of computers, software and training that will allow automatic transfer of data to the states from the AFRCC, along with management of the search, is currently extremely limited and the existing deployment schedule to all the states is planned to take three years. Not many are very happy about that, but only political pressure will likely hurry that up. Until then, notification from the AFRCC will be via phone and fax, as is currently done with ELT alerts.

With regards to this information supplied to the states prior to integration, the AFRCC will translate the technical data received from the NOAA computers into plain English that existing state SAR personnel will understand.

Some states continue to be adamantly opposed to PLBs and have resisted even learning about the alert process. In some cases it has been discovered that poor communications have been the problem and once that is addressed opposition goes away. In any case, the AFRCC will just plug away and will still deliver the data to the states in the same manner as they do now, it will be up to the states to deal with it. It is clear that any liability rests with the states if they choose to stick their head into the sand.

Concern was expressed about the potential for false alerts, either inadvertent or deliberate hoaxes. Many participants still weren’t familiar with the activation requirements for the beacons and translated their bad experience with both ELT and EPIRB false alerts, caused by automatic activation, to the PLBs. Relief was expressed when it was explained how PLBs require manual activation and that this activation requires at least two deliberate steps that are unlikely to occur inadvertently. The low 7% false alert rate from the Alaska Test Program was also reassuring.

There was some concern expressed for the need to have some state level of regulation that would allow for state prosecution of hoax alerts. While some states indicated they were looking into the issue, most felt that existing false alarm statutes provided adequate response to the issue. Plus, it was explained that there are federal felony penalties for misuse as well.

In response to concerns about persons using the PLBs inappropriately for non-emergency situations, it was pointed out that one person’s emergency is not the same as another’s; perception varies by individual. Opinion was expressed that there will always be such events and that the only real solution was education. Said more than one attendee, "the good from PLBs outweighs any bad from such inappropriate alerts." It is likely to be no worse, and most likely less of an issue that currently experienced with cell phones. It is simply the price of admission. The general consensus of the experts is that the concerns were overblown.

At least initially, participants felt that the relatively high cost of the beacons, starting in the neighborhood of $500-$600, will ensure that these will not be sold off the shelves at Wal-Mart and that those buying PLBs are likely to be better educated about them and more responsible. Prosecution of any overt abuse will serve to get the message across, but unless it is overt, the general consensus was to do nothing beyond perhaps a stern lecture that would cause someone to delay using the devices in a real emergency.

There was some discussion of the likelihood that some organizations and outdoor outfitters will develop programs to rent beacons and what should be done to ensure that the information required about the actual user of the beacon will be readily available to SAR, since they will not be the registered owner in the database. Some of the participants indicated they were looking at regulatory answers to the perceived problem with 24 hour contact requirements that the renting agencies would have to fulfill in order to rent beacons. It was pointed out BoatUS has had a very successful EPIRB rental program in existence for many years and that this might be a good model for any PLB rental regulations or standards.

It was pointed out by one attendee that despite all the attention and concern, the reality is that PLB alerts will not be very different from ELT alerts that states and local SAR resources have been responding to for years. Some felt it was all much ado about nothing.

Public education will be an ongoing and long-term process and despite efforts on the part of NOAA, the AFRCC and the PLB manufacturers, unfortunately not well coordinated for the most part, it will take time. Media attention to both successful rescues using PLBs and of any prosecution of hoax alerts will probably do more than anything else to get the word out to the general public.