joining back up

[SarDragon]

OK, folks, we're having a disconnect here on what constitutes Level I.

It includes ALL of these things:

1. OPSEC
2. Safety Orientation
3. CPPT
4. EO
5. Foundations module.

A long, long time ago, Level I was just part 5 from my list. You never have to retake this part. It's what you get credit for with a Mitchell award.

The other parts have been added over the years, and need to be retaken if there's a lapse in membership over two years.

Here's an excerpt from my record to illustrate:

Foundations	MITCHELL	23 Apr 1987
CPPT	Course	26 Feb 2001
OPS - OPSEC	Online	13 Jun 2006
EO	ONLINE	31 Jan 2009
Intro to CAP Safety	ONLINE	26 Jan 2011

The 1987 date is my most recent join date, after a six year break. My Mitchell date is actually 31 Aug 1967
.

[Storm Chaser]

OK, folks, we're having a disconnect here on what constitutes Level I.

It includes ALL of these things:

1. OPSEC
2. Safety Orientation
3. CPPT
4. EO
5. Foundations module.

A long, long time ago, Level I was just part 5 from my list. You never have to retake this part. It's what you get credit for with a Mitchell award.

The other parts have been added over the years, and need to be retaken if there's a lapse in membership over two years.

I got my Mitchell in 1989; when I became a senior member in 1995, I didn't have to do Foundations. But when I rejoined after a long break in service, I had to redo everything, including Foundations, to complete my Level 1.

[SarDragon]

You got hosed. We just had someone rejoin after a 10+ year break, and Foundations was still good.

[Storm Chaser]

Well, that's interesting. A lot of things have changed in CAP during the last 10 years. Maybe CAP should make people redo Foundations if their lapse in membership is over two years.

[Camas]

If the break was for more than two years, you start new. Some of your achievements do not expire and are supposed to be there. Having said that, if your break was for more than two years, you begin fresh as a naked baby. You have to re-take Level I. And you are no longer 1st Lieutenant. You are a Senior Member. Once you pass Level 1, your present squadron commander can authorize you to your former grade. You have to show you held that grade, or a call to NHQ membership department may be able to substantiate your claim.

I would suggest you submit a CAPF2 and submit it to your unit commander for approval. It doesn't need to go any higher and I don't agree about a call to NHQ. This has to be approved by your commander who then submits it to NHQ.

[Eclipse]

Why wouldn't you call NHQ?  If the member can't verify previous grade, how else would you substantiate it?

[Storm Chaser]

Why wouldn't you call NHQ?  If the member can't verify previous grade, how else would you substantiate it?

Agree. When I rejoined, I had to call NHQ a few times to update my record and seek guidance. That, in addition to talking to my unit commander, help tremendously. Some of my PD was showing up in eServices and some was not. None of my cadet record was. I strongly recommend talking to NHQ; its staff is there to help.

[NIN]

Ahh, the benefits of retiring.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Just reiterating what has been said in the past 5 messages.

As an example, you rejoin after 5 years you do not have to take the entire level I if you have Mitchell.

(From SarDragon)

1. OPSEC
2. Safety Orientation
3. CPPT
4. EO
5. Foundations module.

You have to take 1 to 4, which were not part of Level I.

You do not have to take 5. However as has been pointed out, there are changes from then which may make it to your best interest to really take it.

Some commanders are not aware of the Mitchell caveat, and make you retake it because of ignorance. Others may be aware, and are aware the world is different, and are making you take because of the changes.

Again, reinstatement of grade is not supposed to be automatic. However submit it anyway.

And sometimes you do have to contact NHQ if you do not have proof of what you earned, or your online records after joining do not show your past achievements. They have some records online which are not visible nor will become visible when you rejoin after a long absence.

Flyer

[sarmed1]

Interesting... I came into that unit back in '01, and am now in PA too... we likely know some of the same people.

mk

[SarDragon]

Just reiterating what has been said in the past 5 messages.

As an example, you rejoin after 5 years you do not have to take the entire level I if you have Mitchell.

(From SarDragon)

1. OPSEC
2. Safety Orientation
3. CPPT
4. EO
5. Foundations module.

You have to take 1 to 4, which were not part of Level I.

Incorrect. As stated in my post, ALL FIVE of the items in the list are part of Level I. I took the list directly from the NHQ web site.

[brent.teal]

i did all 5.  I am just waiting on the paperwork to clear.  Foundations was a good review and did not take all that long.

[Luis R. Ramos]

SAR-

You misread my post!

You have to take 1 to 4, which were not part of Level I.

Read again. "Which were not part" means that at the time the former/new person was a member were not part of Level 1. Again, "were not" is talking about the past. Thus its opposite, "the present" is now part, and as you stated, are included now.

The former member is a Mitchell recipient, thus he is exempt from 5 only.

Must we now include classes on reading messages on Level 1? Oh wait, we include "communication" for SLS.

Flyer

[Storm Chaser]

Foundations was a good review and did not take all that long.

That's why I recommend completing Foundations after a long break in service, whether you are exempt or not. The way I see it, if you know everything you need to know, then it's a quick review that doesn't take long at all. If you don't, then you get the opportunity to learn it before completing Level 1. It's a win-win situation.

[SarDragon]

SAR-

You misread my post!

You have to take 1 to 4, which were not part of Level I.

Read again. "Which were not part" means that at the time the former/new person was a member were not part of Level 1. Again, "were not" is talking about the past. Thus its opposite, "the present" is now part, and as you stated, are included now.

The former member is a Mitchell recipient, thus he is exempt from 5 only.

Must we now include classes on reading messages on Level 1? Oh wait, we include "communication" for SLS.

Flyer

Relax. Take a couple of deep breaths. Better now?

I did just fine reading your post.

CPPT was a part of Level I when the OP left CAP. It's been there since some time in the '90s.

You're right, the other three parts weren't back then. That still doesn't change the current requirements, and the current composition of Level I.

[Luis R. Ramos]

You are the one that needs to relax.

You keep referring to the current requirements as if I was addressing them, or was part of a conversation denying they existed.

You are very stubborn. Found wrong do not want to accept it. Nice treat to pass on to cadets!

Flyer

[NIN]

Wow, a pissing contest on CAP-Talk about semantics? No.

Mark this down as a first. I mean, the first thousandth time. Er, first hundred thousandth time.

[PHall]

You are the one that needs to relax.

You keep referring to the current requirements as if I was addressing them, or was part of a conversation denying they existed.

You are very stubborn. Found wrong do not want to accept it. Nice treat to pass on to cadets!

Flyer

What is with YOU?    First you're on my case, then Eclipse and now Sar Dragon....

Maybe you need to take some time away from the internets for awhile. And get that stress level under control.

[Luis R. Ramos]

You are the only one that is being rude.

First you react to a message I posted with the same joking attitude that others posted. With Eclipse I agree with some of his stuff and do not with others. Just like everyone else in this board.

Against you? Mr Hall, you think yourself as the ultimate censor. I will start calling you Adolf Hitler since you want to control and censor on this board.

Flyer

[Storm Chaser]

I know it's easy to get passionate with some of these discussions; it happens to all of us. But this thread is about someone wanting to rejoin CAP. I don't think us arguing about this helps the OP with the process or even motivate others to want to join CAP as well.