CAP REGULATION 52-10 CADET PROTECTION POLICY

Started by negraru96, July 10, 2015, 10:51:33 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

negraru96

Good Afternoon all,

      I have a concern that needs clarification. Under the circumstance if you are a leader and are teaching/training a student in drill and the said student executes the opposite flank from the leaders commands, is it against Cadet Protection Policy to passively touch that student and point in the direction of where that student should go?

     I am currently reviewing CAP REGULATION 52-10 CADET PROTECTION POLICY and nowhere do I see that action to qualify as forms of "abuse" or to be deemed as inappropriate. In my opinion, the action above may be deemed in an exaggerated sense to be called "abuse". If you notice on section 1-2 subpoint D. it states that another experienced leader may report abuse and the above leader/ teacher would have to comply with the same information given by that report.

    Cadet Protection Policy clearly states that if a leader is exposing signs of any physical abuse or harm to the student, that leader would qualify under noncompliance to the CPP. The above action being accused as "abuse" or "acts of disciplinary action" is simply over exaggerated as simple physical contact definitely DOES NOT have prominence in the same sense as physical abuse or imminent risk to future abuse.

   I need further clarification on this. Thank you.
C/CMSgt Michael Negraru, Civil Air Patrol

PHall

Have you completed CPPT? Are you a Cadet or a Senior? It does make a difference.

SarDragon

Don't do it.

Point out the proper direction, but don't touch the cadet.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

negraru96

Quote from: PHall on July 10, 2015, 11:05:43 PM
Have you completed CPPT? Are you a Cadet or a Senior? It does make a difference.


Thank you for replying, I am a cadet of 17 years of age. I have not completed the CPPT course.
C/CMSgt Michael Negraru, Civil Air Patrol

negraru96

Quote from: SarDragon on July 10, 2015, 11:06:15 PM
Don't do it.

Point out the proper direction, but don't touch the cadet.

Under what regulation is touching a student wrong? There must be distinctions in how you touch them. I need clarification on that as well.
C/CMSgt Michael Negraru, Civil Air Patrol

abdsp51

Quote from: negraru96 on July 10, 2015, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on July 10, 2015, 11:06:15 PM
Don't do it.

Point out the proper direction, but don't touch the cadet.

Under what regulation is touching a student wrong? There must be distinctions in how you touch them. I need clarification on that as well.

Cadet it's called common courtesy and respect.  You do not touch anyone without their permission period and if you wish to remain in the org I suggest you take heed.  There doesn't need to be a reg to govern everything but since you want clarification.  That simple act of touching can be considered battery by state statutes.

Plus all it takes is for the cadet that YOU touched to feel uncomfortable about it and report it.  Is that a ringer you want to go through?  It's simple and has been spelled out do not do it period. 

I would think that by now being 17 and a C/SNCO that you would have learned to keep your hands to yourself.


SarDragon

Mr Negraru, you came here for guidance, from a group of CAP members with dozens of years of experience. We gave it to you, although it's not what you were expecting. No one likes to be told they are wrong, but the mature thing to do is accept it, and move on.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

negraru96

#7
Quote from: SarDragon on July 11, 2015, 01:21:37 AM
Mr Negraru, you came here for guidance, from a group of CAP members with dozens of years of experience. We gave it to you, although it's not what you were expecting. No one likes to be told they are wrong, but the mature thing to do is accept it, and move on.


Thank you Sir, I am grateful for this guidance you have brought upon me, but I see touching people as a useful teaching tool inside and outside of CAP, I understand that not everybody is the same, meaning that they would not appreciate getting touched or helped by physical contact. I understand that forced/ aggressive contact as well as noncompliance with his/her own wishes to be untouched would mean battery against an individual; but this passive-like friendly form of physical contact seems essential for learning as it provides a solid basis for further understanding that words can't do. If a person does not want to be touched, simply put, leave them alone, I get it, but this is not what I am trying to say. Do you understand where I am getting at here?
C/CMSgt Michael Negraru, Civil Air Patrol

abdsp51

Quote from: negraru96 on July 11, 2015, 06:02:23 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on July 11, 2015, 01:21:37 AM
Mr Negraru, you came here for guidance, from a group of CAP members with dozens of years of experience. We gave it to you, although it's not what you were expecting. No one likes to be told they are wrong, but the mature thing to do is accept it, and move on.


Thank you Sir, I am grateful for this guidance you have brought upon me, but I see touching people as a useful teaching tool inside and outside of CAP, I understand that not everybody is the same, meaning that they would not appreciate getting touched or helped by physical contact. I understand that forced/ aggressive contact as well as noncompliance with his/her own wishes to be untouched would mean battery against an individual; but this passive-like friendly form of physical contact seems essential for learning as it provides a solid basis for further understanding that words can't do. If a person does not want to be touched, simply put, leave them alone, I get it, but this is not what I am trying to say. Do you understand where I am getting at here?

Cadet we get it, we are telling you not to do it.  You are opening a can of worms you may not be able to deal with.  Don't do it. 

capmaj

When you take cadet protection you will discover that one of the classic signs of abuse is a fear of touch. As you have no idea about the true nature of the cadets in your charge, you can't assume you know what's going on in their private lives.

It doesn't matter what you perceive your preference to be in terms of your teaching practices...... the well-being and protection of those under your care always takes priority!

And there is also the suggestion that, if your students require "touching" to understand the message that you are trying to convey.... then you might need to take a look at your communication techniques.

Just a thought.

ZigZag911

A better approach would be to have the cadet fall out of ranks and watch the others doing it properly...some people learn better visually.

Al Sayre

Here's an easy way to help a cadet that can't remember left from right at first and that won't embarrass him/her by calling them out of flight.  Give them a small stone or marble to cup in their left hand while performing drill.  It doesn't interfere with saluting or performing normal dress maneuvers (yes I know about Dress Left,but it's not a "Normal"maneuver), and no one but you and they need to know they have it.
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

TheSkyHornet

If at any time you need to touch anyone, senior member or cadet, say, to fix a uniform issue or show them arm movement for saluting, say "Requesting permission to touch."

If they say "yes," "permission granted," or "proceed," or anything of that nature, go ahead. If they say "no," or anything of that nature, don't touch.

Common sense.

Ned

Chief Negraru,

I have a slightly different take from my colleagues.

First, let me compliment you for taking the time to read the 52-10.  I wish more cadet NCOs would read the actual source documents.  I also want to commend you for asking for guidance in a potentially sensitive area.  That also speaks well for you.

And to answer the question you posed in your original post, in most cases it would not be a violation of the CPP for you to touch a cadet and point the in the direction that you want them to go.

That's because the CPP is a regulation that defines and prohibits abuse.  "Abuse" is defined in the regulation, and since merely touching a cadet to in the circumstances you describe is neither a sexual touching nor likely to harm the cadet, the unconsented touching does not rise to the level of "abuse."

As long as you are reading CAP doctrine, take a moment and look at CAPP 52-13, The CPP Implementation Guide, particularly at the bottom of page 20 / top of page 21, where it talks about determining whether a particular touching could amount to hazing.

To my colleagues reading this, the "permission to touch" ritual has a long history in CAP, and certainly can have value. But like any other tradition can be elevated to the level where otherwise reasonable people will start seeing abuse and boundary concerns where there are none. 

It is simply not abuse nor a boundary violation for me to put my hand on the shoulder of a cadet who has received bad news.  Or to clap the shoulder of a cadet who has just run their fastest mile ever.  You don't need to ask "permission to touch" to pull a cadet out of the way of a speeding vehicle, high-five a cadet who just received their Mitchell, or to shake the hand of a COS graduate as you hand them their diploma.

Do I ask "permission to touch" before correcting a salute or touching insignia during an inspection?  Yes, I do.  But for me, it is a rule based on courtesy and to avoid surprises rather than some sort of charm against abuse.

The ordinary wisdom and common sense possessed by every CAP leader (cadet and senior) will avoid 99.9 % of all CPP issues.  Our written rules contained in the 52-10 and 52-23 are designed to prevent the rest.  Let's not add any new rules to the CPP until they are necessary and have been vetted by NHQ and added to the regulation.


Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Programs Manager

vorteks

Quote from: Ned on July 13, 2015, 06:17:39 PM
Chief Negraru,

I have a slightly different take from my colleagues.

First, let me compliment you for taking the time to read the 52-10.  I wish more cadet NCOs would read the actual source documents.  I also want to commend you for asking for guidance in a potentially sensitive area.  That also speaks well for you.

And to answer the question you posed in your original post, in most cases it would not be a violation of the CPP for you to touch a cadet and point the in the direction that you want them to go.

That's because the CPP is a regulation that defines and prohibits abuse.  "Abuse" is defined in the regulation, and since merely touching a cadet to in the circumstances you describe is neither a sexual touching nor likely to harm the cadet, the unconsented touching does not rise to the level of "abuse."

As long as you are reading CAP doctrine, take a moment and look at CAPP 52-13, The CPP Implementation Guide, particularly at the bottom of page 20 / top of page 21, where it talks about determining whether a particular touching could amount to hazing.

To my colleagues reading this, the "permission to touch" ritual has a long history in CAP, and certainly can have value. But like any other tradition can be elevated to the level where otherwise reasonable people will start seeing abuse and boundary concerns where there are none. 

It is simply not abuse nor a boundary violation for me to put my hand on the shoulder of a cadet who has received bad news.  Or to clap the shoulder of a cadet who has just run their fastest mile ever.  You don't need to ask "permission to touch" to pull a cadet out of the way of a speeding vehicle, high-five a cadet who just received their Mitchell, or to shake the hand of a COS graduate as you hand them their diploma.

Do I ask "permission to touch" before correcting a salute or touching insignia during an inspection?  Yes, I do.  But for me, it is a rule based on courtesy and to avoid surprises rather than some sort of charm against abuse.

The ordinary wisdom and common sense possessed by every CAP leader (cadet and senior) will avoid 99.9 % of all CPP issues.  Our written rules contained in the 52-10 and 52-23 are designed to prevent the rest.  Let's not add any new rules to the CPP until they are necessary and have been vetted by NHQ and added to the regulation.


Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Programs Manager

:clap:

Alaric

Quote from: Ned on July 13, 2015, 06:17:39 PM
Chief Negraru,

I have a slightly different take from my colleagues.

First, let me compliment you for taking the time to read the 52-10.  I wish more cadet NCOs would read the actual source documents.  I also want to commend you for asking for guidance in a potentially sensitive area.  That also speaks well for you.

And to answer the question you posed in your original post, in most cases it would not be a violation of the CPP for you to touch a cadet and point the in the direction that you want them to go.

That's because the CPP is a regulation that defines and prohibits abuse.  "Abuse" is defined in the regulation, and since merely touching a cadet to in the circumstances you describe is neither a sexual touching nor likely to harm the cadet, the unconsented touching does not rise to the level of "abuse."

As long as you are reading CAP doctrine, take a moment and look at CAPP 52-13, The CPP Implementation Guide, particularly at the bottom of page 20 / top of page 21, where it talks about determining whether a particular touching could amount to hazing.

To my colleagues reading this, the "permission to touch" ritual has a long history in CAP, and certainly can have value. But like any other tradition can be elevated to the level where otherwise reasonable people will start seeing abuse and boundary concerns where there are none. 

It is simply not abuse nor a boundary violation for me to put my hand on the shoulder of a cadet who has received bad news.  Or to clap the shoulder of a cadet who has just run their fastest mile ever.  You don't need to ask "permission to touch" to pull a cadet out of the way of a speeding vehicle, high-five a cadet who just received their Mitchell, or to shake the hand of a COS graduate as you hand them their diploma.

Do I ask "permission to touch" before correcting a salute or touching insignia during an inspection?  Yes, I do.  But for me, it is a rule based on courtesy and to avoid surprises rather than some sort of charm against abuse.

The ordinary wisdom and common sense possessed by every CAP leader (cadet and senior) will avoid 99.9 % of all CPP issues.  Our written rules contained in the 52-10 and 52-23 are designed to prevent the rest.  Let's not add any new rules to the CPP until they are necessary and have been vetted by NHQ and added to the regulation.


Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Programs Manager

That's why Col. Lee is the man :)

Brit_in_CAP

Quote from: Ned on July 13, 2015, 06:17:39 PM
Chief Negraru,

I have a slightly different take from my colleagues.

First, let me compliment you for taking the time to read the 52-10.  I wish more cadet NCOs would read the actual source documents.  I also want to commend you for asking for guidance in a potentially sensitive area.  That also speaks well for you.

And to answer the question you posed in your original post, in most cases it would not be a violation of the CPP for you to touch a cadet and point the in the direction that you want them to go.

That's because the CPP is a regulation that defines and prohibits abuse.  "Abuse" is defined in the regulation, and since merely touching a cadet to in the circumstances you describe is neither a sexual touching nor likely to harm the cadet, the unconsented touching does not rise to the level of "abuse."

As long as you are reading CAP doctrine, take a moment and look at CAPP 52-13, The CPP Implementation Guide, particularly at the bottom of page 20 / top of page 21, where it talks about determining whether a particular touching could amount to hazing.

To my colleagues reading this, the "permission to touch" ritual has a long history in CAP, and certainly can have value. But like any other tradition can be elevated to the level where otherwise reasonable people will start seeing abuse and boundary concerns where there are none. 

It is simply not abuse nor a boundary violation for me to put my hand on the shoulder of a cadet who has received bad news.  Or to clap the shoulder of a cadet who has just run their fastest mile ever.  You don't need to ask "permission to touch" to pull a cadet out of the way of a speeding vehicle, high-five a cadet who just received their Mitchell, or to shake the hand of a COS graduate as you hand them their diploma.

Do I ask "permission to touch" before correcting a salute or touching insignia during an inspection?  Yes, I do.  But for me, it is a rule based on courtesy and to avoid surprises rather than some sort of charm against abuse.

The ordinary wisdom and common sense possessed by every CAP leader (cadet and senior) will avoid 99.9 % of all CPP issues.  Our written rules contained in the 52-10 and 52-23 are designed to prevent the rest.  Let's not add any new rules to the CPP until they are necessary and have been vetted by NHQ and added to the regulation.


Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Programs Manager
:clap:
Very nicely written - so nicely written that I'll keep a copy to remind myself to stay grounded!

catrulz

Ned,

I think there is a prevalent paranoia concerned with touching cadets.  I don't allow my seniors to touch cadets.  I prefer them to congratulate by shaking hands versus patting on the back.  I think this stems from two issues.

1. You really don't know what one cadet will interpret as appropriate touching versus what another will accept.

2. I don't want treat cadets differently for fear of appearance of favoritism.

In this light it is better to apply one form of acceptable interaction universally.

When we approach CPPT, many of us go beyond what is regulatory, just to be sure it is not interpreted as a violation by the cadet.  I do believe there is a different standard between cadets, and I often use senior cadets for on the spot corrections for saluting, proper arm extension on dress-right-dress, etc.  Even when a cadet turns 18, and they are required to complete CPPT, a younger cadet still normally sees them as a fellow cadet.

What I would counsel the young cadet OP on is that touching is still a form of non-verbal communication.  Be careful what your conveying when rendering any type of communication.  Keep in mind that you are correcting in front of the junior cadets peers.  As an earlier poster said, watch the respect and perception there of.  If the cadet you communicated with (by touching, speaking, facial expression, body language) feels intimidated, you need to alter your leadership technique.

Ned

Quote from: catrulz on July 14, 2015, 04:15:16 PM
Ned,

I think there is a prevalent paranoia concerned with touching cadets.  I don't allow my seniors to touch cadets.  I prefer them to congratulate by shaking hands versus patting on the back.  I think this stems from two issues.

1. You really don't know what one cadet will interpret as appropriate touching versus what another will accept.

2. I don't want treat cadets differently for fear of appearance of favoritism.

In this light it is better to apply one form of acceptable interaction universally.

When we approach CPPT, many of us go beyond what is regulatory, just to be sure it is not interpreted as a violation by the cadet.  I do believe there is a different standard between cadets, and I often use senior cadets for on the spot corrections for saluting, proper arm extension on dress-right-dress, etc.  Even when a cadet turns 18, and they are required to complete CPPT, a younger cadet still normally sees them as a fellow cadet.

What I would counsel the young cadet OP on is that touching is still a form of non-verbal communication.  Be careful what your conveying when rendering any type of communication.  Keep in mind that you are correcting in front of the junior cadets peers.  As an earlier poster said, watch the respect and perception there of.  If the cadet you communicated with (by touching, speaking, facial expression, body language) feels intimidated, you need to alter your leadership technique.

I don't think we have any serious disagreement, except possibly for the last sentence I highlighted above. 

I can only agree that touching is a form of non-verbal communication, and leaders must always be mindful of how they communicate with the troops.

And I also agree that there is a feedback loop between leaders and the troops, and we watch for the effect our words and actions have on the group and individuals.

It may be just the usual internet semantics, but the way you wrote it, it almost sounds as if you are advocating that we should alter our group leadership techniques based on the interior subjective feelings of individual cadets.  (Which of course, are unknowable to anyone else.)

If one cadet out of 100 has been a survivor of abuse and has a unexpressed strong aversion to being touched (and in my profession, I see that all the time), that does not suggest that I should never touch other cadets under any circumstances.  And that is because I agree with you that touch can be a powerful form of communication for Good as well as Evil, and withholding of praise and sympathy (the above described high fives and shoulder touches) sends just as powerful a message. 


I would offer that the best approach is to gauge our group leadership actions on an objective standard - how would our actions affect a reasonable cadet of the same age, grade, experience, etc. in the same or similar circumstances.

I agree that good leaders take their cadets as they come, and individual cadets have a wide range of maturity levels, especially at the lower end of our age range.  If I have an individual cadet who appears to be "stressing out" before or during an inspection at encampment, I would take him or her aside and take appropriate actions to ensure a good outcome.  (Time out, counseling, distraction, etc.)  But I would not necessarily change the activities of the rest of the flight based on the reaction of especially sensitive cadets.

We watch out for individuals, of course.  The CP should certainly "do no harm" to our terrific cadets.  But the whole purpose of the cadet program is to grow outstanding leaders and Americans by way of a rigorous, challenging program.

As I said, I suspect we are in almost total agreement in this area.  Thank you for the work you do with our cadets.


abdsp51

LtCol Lee you are the SME on this that's for sure.  Let me ask you this say this cadet touched another to correct improper drill.  The touched cadet feels uncomfortable with it and says something to the CC about it. 

While per your guidance on CPPT its not a violation but now the CC has an uneasy issue on his/her hands.

Based on your experience how should the CC handle this?  (For the sake of the scene its a brand new CC)

Ned

Quote from: abdsp51 on July 14, 2015, 09:14:12 PM
LtCol Lee you are the SME on this that's for sure.  Let me ask you this say this cadet touched another to correct improper drill.  The touched cadet feels uncomfortable with it and says something to the CC about it. 

While per your guidance on CPPT its not a violation but now the CC has an uneasy issue on his/her hands.

Based on your experience how should the CC handle this?  (For the sake of the scene its a brand new CC)

If I were the CC faced with the hypothetical, the first thing I would do would be to take a few moments and speak with affected cadet to get a sense of what is going on.  In many cases, the cadet will just be reporting the touching because the cadet misunderstood the Wingman course and believed that he/she was always supposed to report any touching.  If that's the case, a quick review of the rules should be sufficient and the problem is solved.

I would also take the opportunity to suggest that in some, but not all, circumstances like this it is most appropriate for the cadets involved to have a brief discussion.  "Hey, Sgt / Chief / Ma'am, I would prefer that you not touch me during routine drill instruction."  "OK, no worries airman.  Now about those flanking movements . . . ."

Of course the affected cadet may not be comfortable with that procedure, and I would never want to discourage a cadet from coming to me or suggest that this isn't worthy of my time.  (Because it is indeed worthy of my time.)

Depending on the circumstances, I might want to have a word with the cadet CoC.  "Staff, one or more of the cadets have expressed some discomfort with your teaching styles.  I would like you to reflect on this evening's instruction and avoid any touching of the troops that might make the average cadet uncomfortable.  And of course, if any cadet has asked you not to touch them, please be respectful of their wishes in this regard."

Or simply "Hey, Jones has asked that you don't touch him during drill instruction.  Please be respectful of his wishes."

Again, it is my position that words or actions that inadvertently make a cadet uncomfortable because of hidden or unusual feelings is not abuse nor a boundary concern.  I've previously used the example of a senior at encampment encouraging a flight during PT by saying something like "My grandmother can do better pushups than you" without knowing that Cadet Jones' beloved Grandma died the week before encampment and Jones then bursts into tears because of what the senior said.

(It is, of course, a different story of a leader knows of a cadet's unusual feelings or sensibilities and deliberately uses actions or words that the leader knows will cause the cadet distress.)




Mitchell 1969

Quote from: abdsp51 on July 14, 2015, 09:14:12 PM
LtCol Lee you are the SME on this that's for sure.

I think "LtCol Lee" is no longer the SME.

(Reference - signature block, reply #13)
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.

MSG Mac

Quote from: negraru96 on July 10, 2015, 11:06:49 PM
Quote from: PHall on July 10, 2015, 11:05:43 PM
Have you completed CPPT? Are you a Cadet or a Senior? It does make a difference.


Thank you for replying, I am a cadet of 17 years of age. I have not completed the CPPT course.

Please do at your earliest opportunity
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
50 Year Member

SarDragon

Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on July 15, 2015, 07:06:16 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on July 14, 2015, 09:14:12 PM
LtCol Lee you are the SME on this that's for sure.

I think "LtCol Lee" is no longer the SME.

(Reference - signature block, reply #13)
"LtCol Lee" will always be the SME, based on previous duty assignments and experience. Just because he no longer has the title, it doesn't mean that his vast knowledge has gone away.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

PHall

Quote from: SarDragon on July 15, 2015, 07:44:04 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on July 15, 2015, 07:06:16 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on July 14, 2015, 09:14:12 PM
LtCol Lee you are the SME on this that's for sure.

I think "LtCol Lee" is no longer the SME.

(Reference - signature block, reply #13)
"LtCol Lee" will always be the SME, based on previous duty assignments and experience. Just because he no longer has the title, it doesn't mean that his vast knowledge has gone away.

He's the current Director of Cadet Programs at National. So how is COL Lee not the SME?

SarDragon

Quote from: PHall on July 15, 2015, 07:53:06 PM
Quote from: SarDragon on July 15, 2015, 07:44:04 PM
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on July 15, 2015, 07:06:16 AM
Quote from: abdsp51 on July 14, 2015, 09:14:12 PM
LtCol Lee you are the SME on this that's for sure.

I think "LtCol Lee" is no longer the SME.

(Reference - signature block, reply #13)
"LtCol Lee" will always be the SME, based on previous duty assignments and experience. Just because he no longer has the title, it doesn't mean that his vast knowledge has gone away.

He's the current Director of Cadet Programs at National. So how is COL Lee not the SME?

In my experience, the SMEs are indians, not chiefs. Ned is now the chief.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

ZigZag911

More to the point, isn't Ned a CAP Colonel now?

abdsp51

I would say that Col Lee(apologies for the wrong grade used earlier) who had a hand in drafting the new CPPT and given his position as the National DCP is a SME on this topic.

Mitchell 1969

Yes, indeed, my point was that he is no longer LtCol Lee.
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.