Questioning Blue Berets Qualification Methods...?

[Luis R. Ramos]

One of my cadets went to NBB and came back with a letter stating he finished FLM, MRO, and UDF.

I pushed for someone at Group level to enter this cadet's achievements. They were denied at Wing level, basically because of "being achieved in the same day."

Was I wrong to have accepted that letter as ESO? Should I have asked the cadet "to explain how was it possible to achieve all on the same day?" Or should I, a Captain, have asked the NBB/CC, a Colonel, to explain "how is it possible for a cadet to achieve those things in the same day?"  Sarcasm... if you misunderstood my tone...

Begs the questions...

1) The same letter credits that cadet with 3 finds. Should I question him about those...?
2) Has any other person attending NBB gone through this hassle to have their achievements credited?

Now I understand better Eclipse's answer to me on a private message. It seems to me that if a member earns or is awarded an achievement for activity XYZ, it should be entered into his records by activity XYZ personnel, and not sent home with a letter to have Squadron, Group, or Wing personnel enter it on a member's records since the activity personnel know much better than anyone else how/the circumstances under which the achievement(s) was (were) made!

This cadet's achievements are out of my hands.

The Wing person has requested:

1) The cadet to explain how was that possible.
2) The squadron commander to call him.

Again, has this happened to anyone participating in NBB?

Do not want to identify my Wing.

Flyer

[flyboy53]

That's not uncommon -- questioning ES qualifications earned at NBB.

In this instance, however, the proof is pretty easy. Each NBB participant is given an envelope with all the necessary backup paperwork that is supposed to be shown to the unit commander upon return -- especially to verify such questions.

Have him produce the paperwork, copy it for wing, or be prepared to take the cadet and paperwork to Group for that individual to verify the qualifications. Then, if wing is still questioning it, have the group staff member take it up with wing, or have the group commander approach the wing commander about it.

[Luis R. Ramos]

I anticipated that, scanned the letter stating the achievement, and uploaded a copy onto each requirement. Well before the achievements were submitted. That person ignored the letters.

This person has at least 20 years as a CAP member. It is not likely that this is the first time. My Wing is rather large, so I am sure more than a few members have gone to NBB.

Flyer

[flyboy53]

BTW, I like Eclipse's comments about activity personnel doing it to eliminate any questions, but that has never been my experience. In my wing, we are super sensitive about such information especially after having a cadet that made such claims and had paperwork to verify it -- then when the paperwork was checked for CAPSNs to verify who signed off on the achievement, it was learned that that individual was never there.

[NC Hokie]

I anticipated that, scanned the letter stating the achievement, and uploaded a copy onto each requirement. Well before the achievements were submitted. That person ignored the letters.

Weren't there any completed SQTRs in the information packet the cadet received?  A letter stating that someone did XYZ is a lot less persuasive than a set of completed SQTRs.

[ol'fido]

I have never been to NBB. I have been associated with CAP for nearly four decades. Could this letter simply be the product of an Admin type who didn't really want to go through all the records for all the attendees and find out what specific date they accomplished a particular task and simply wrote the same date for everything. That is the usual bureaucratic answer for these things.

[a2capt]

NBB is so organized, I'd have been shocked if they didn't do it with some kind of form letter like that.

I have no issue with that one.  They were all dated in "one day", but the mission was two weeks long. Certainly the better part of a week was spent executing it.

Come on, really? They can teach you to fly a plane and be licensed in a two week period. You can't learn FLM, UDF, and MRO .. in the same, and gain some decent proficiency, that will stick longer than the majority of other CAP training, just because NBB is fairly concentrated and intense?

More people denying things because they don't like it, or agree with it. Don't like it? Take it -up- the chain and get an approved supplement. CAWG does a similar thing with "the two sorties can't be on the same day."  That in and of itself is somewhat easier to work around.

Maybe next year's NBB letters should sprinkle random dates on the thing. ;-) Ugh.

OTOH, it's HMRS that.. brings out the sceptic in me. Not that they don't teach anything, it's the unwritten stuff that throws gravel in my path.

[Eclipse]

One of my cadets went to NBB and came back with a letter stating he finished FLM, MRO, and UDF.

We don't award ES qualifications via PAs, there isn't even a way with the new system to enter them unless someone
locally used their own CAP ID and falsified the qualifications.

If NBB properly tasked these members, then they need to provide either properly completed SQTRs along with the PAs,
or the members need to enter the CAP IDs of their respective SET(s) and have them validate the tasks electronically, including
mission participation.

This is one of the advantages of the new system, that there's no allowance for any "local only" SET filter, but even with that you
still have to work the process.

[lordmonar]

This is one of those situations where you tell wing to blow it out their butt and make a stink up the chain of command.

a)  Show me in the regs where you can't get everything signed off on the same day.
b)  If wing has a problem with NBB instructors then they need to put their money where their mouth is and make that known to National so that NHQ can fix said problem.

[Eclipse]

a)  Show me in the regs where you can't get everything signed off on the same day.

Agreed, and considering the nature of NBB, FLM, MRO, and UDF over the course of a week, wouldn't really raise any flags for me either.

b)  If wing has a problem with NBB instructors then they need to put their money where their mouth is and make that known to National so that NHQ can fix said problem.

There seems to be two different issues here, though -

...one is the questioning of the integrity of NBB in how they do their sign offs, a legit question, though probably not going to get anywhere since the general feeling about NBB is that we don't like the pancake, but the activity itself is fine, and I don't recall ever hearing about any issues with their SETs.  I agree comepltely that is a Wing ESO has a legit concern, they need to address it before
the activity or through channels and not just by bouncing an individual member's quals.

...one is the expectation that a PA suffices for the qualification.  I would think we all agree it doesn't, especially in light of the new OPS Quals system.

[NCRblues]

I have never been a member of the ES staff portion of NBB, but I can give you a little insight.

NBB ran into some issues with a few wings refusing to recognize any of the quals that NBB did back in 04 and 05. NHQ, in response to the IC's issue with this, said to write the paper that you are currently arguing about.

NBB conducts its ES training in the week before the airshow starts, then the cadets and seniors work the air show week. Each flight rotates through flight line marshaling on 9/27, working the ES side of the house (to include Udf, mro, looking for overdue's ext ext). I believe the last time I was a basic flight TAC, my flight did 31 sorties for ELTs/overdue's.

For the past 6 years the IC of NBB has been Colonel Tim Hansen of kansas wing, who's 101 card has run out of room for more alphabet soup.

[Storm Chaser]

It is not uncommon for these type of activities to put as the qualification date the date of graduation from the activity. That being said, it's surprising that NBB staff didn't entered and approved these qualifications in Ops Qual.

Asking a wing to approve these using a PA as documentation is not the proper procedure, as all tasks and exercise participation need to be completed by an authorized skills evaluator. NESA approves these at the National level. Why can NBB do the same?

[Spaceman3750]

NESA (GSAR at least) has a PDA system written by a long time staffer that does much (all?) of it automagically. NBB may still be on paper and that's why it's left to the member to input for approval.

[lordmonar]

How it gets inputted for approval is not the issue.

The issue is that Wing should not be having heart burn about all the dates being the same.  If they do....a simple call to the NBB staff should be all that is needed to get this member's ES quals approved.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Well, the latest is that a Wing approver denied the cadet's achievements, asked for him to write an explanation, and have the squadron commander call him...

All this after I posted the letter from NBB/CC into the cadet's record. This letter explained the cadet was part of a flight at NBB, that the cadet, along with others of his flight earned their MRO, FLM, and UDF. I am afraid to send a CAPF 2a for the three finds, one for an overdue aircraft and two ELTs this flight earned.

The letter asks that anyone with questions about NBB to call NBB/CC. Obviously this Wing person ignored this letter.

NHQ should have required NBB do like NESA. Someone enter these quals directly into the cadet's record.

Would prevent hassles like these...

Flyer

[Eclipse]

All this after I posted the letter from NBB/CC into the cadet's record. This letter explained the cadet was part of a flight at NBB, that the cadet, along with others of his flight earned their MRO, FLM, and UDF.

OK, so the question remains for me - was the full suite of tasks and missions entered and validated electronically by the respective SETs with the NBB letter
as clarification as to why they were all the same date or person?  In that case they should have been approved.   If it was just a PA from the NBB/CC
and the expectation was that the Wing ESO was supposed to somehow make things happen, then I'd be on his side

I am afraid to send a CAPF 2a for the three finds, one for an overdue aircraft and two ELTs this flight earned.

Well, now those should have a PA from the IC for substantiation.

[greatdane1945]

In regards to ES quals earned at NBB '13.  Cadet attendees are divided into flights.  This year's flights were Alpha through Lima with 11-12 cadets per flight.  On a round-robin basis, cadets go to four different stations with various SQTR items taught at each station.  SQTR's covered were UDF, MRO. and FLM (additional training was provided in this area).   ES staff tracked each cadet's participation in the above training tracks to ensure each SQTR topic was covered.

After initial training, cadets worked an actual AF mission (13M0381).  Again, ES staff tracked each cadet's participation as a member of an UDF team, working as a MRO, and when he/she did FLM-ing.  With up to three aircraft landing on the same runway at the same time...they DID get experience. (Yes, Air Venture is one of the few places where the FAA allows this type of landing situation.  Its the only way they can get all the aircraft onto the field within time period field is open.) 

Our mission was accomplished...cadets recorded 6374 aircraft landings (noting each a/c's registration number, type, color, and time of landing) which proved of great value should an over-due (OD) aircraft alert be issued by the FAA.  If number was on our log...a determination was made as to the best place to look for the plane (general aviation parking, antiques, classics, home-built, etc.). If number wasn't...we looked anyway!  Nearly sixty sorties were fielded with 42 searches (13 OD's/29 ELT's) and 32 finds (8 OD's/22 ELT's). NOTE1: Teams are sent out whether there is an active search or not...thus there are could be more sorties than searches. NOTE2: While on ES duty, participants are rotated through five tasks---north tower & south tower (recording landing a/c numbers/listening for ELTs); comm---working the ES radio channel; north cart & south cart (listening for ELTs/looking for OD's/cruising their assigned half of the airport in a golf cart)...minimum of three personnel to a cart...S/M-driver; cadet radio operator; cadet DF-operator).  FLM-ing is a separate tasking during a different time period.

Paperwork:  This year, NHQ/ES, allowed the qualifications to be entered directly into e-Services.  This was done.  Unless something unexpected happen...each of the cadet participants were 'signed-off' as being qualified in UDF, MRO, FLM.  Additionally, those who completed the prerequisites and did the 'hands-on' radio work were given ICUT credit.
Due to the sheer volume of numbers...the exact date that each cadet qualified in each SQTR task was not noted.  SQTR completions were dated near or on the ending date of the mission.

Paperwork was sent home (as in past years) as a record of the hard work each attendee accomplished during their NBB experience.  For many it will be there only chance to have the opportunity to participate in a search and obtain a 'FIND". Again, due to sheer numbers, individual 2a's were not issued.

Thanks to each of those CAP units (squadrons, groups, wings) that allowed the members of the ES team to work with such a 'great' bunch of cadets.  IF anyone has suggestions as to how to improve 'our' methods.  Feel free to respond:  nbb.es.2013@gmail.com   Also remember that it won't be too long before NCSA's applications will be opened and each of you are invited to apply. 

[Luis R. Ramos]

Nope, my cadet's quals were not entered online. That is what is frustrating me so much.

He came home with a participation letter only. The only thing that was entered for him was his ICUT.

Flyer

[Storm Chaser]

That's your answer there. Somehow, your cadet fell through the crack. It's not the wing's responsibility to track completion of these tasks, but NBB's. I suggest you contact them.

When national activities like these enter these qualification tasks in eServices Ops Qual, they're usually approved right away. The exception is when a member is missing one of the required tasks, for example IS100 or CAPT 117. In that case, the approval is submitted to the wing through normal channels. This can sometimes cause issues when proper documentation is not present or is incomplete.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Again, you did not read my posting.

The Participation Letter does state he completed the certification.

Flyer

[Eclipse]

Again, you did not read my posting.

The Participation Letter does state he completed the certification.

Flyer

OK, but how is that supposed to "work"?  A wing ESO can't just go in and check the "completed" box.

The tasks and mission(s) have to be validated by an SET.

[Storm Chaser]

Again, you did not read my posting.

The Participation Letter does state he completed the certification.

Flyer

I did read your post. I'm telling you that the letter is not enough. NESA gives out participation letters too, but they also enter all tasks in Ops Quals. And from what I read on a previous post, NBB does the same; they just didn't do it for your cadet.

NBB was supposed to enter these tasks in eServices, but apparently that did not happen. It's not your wing's job to fix this. You need to contact NBB. They should be able to take care of your cadet.

[a2capt]

At the bottom of the paper given, it says:

"Anyone with questions concerning the training conducted at National Blue Beret 2013 should contact the '13 NBB/ES/Comm Director, Col. Tim Hansen, ... @ .. net . "

If you have the letter, you've got the email address. Just ask. I'm sure the CAPID of the evaluator can be provided so that those tasks can be entered.

[JeffDG]

Again, you did not read my posting.

The Participation Letter does state he completed the certification.

Flyer

That's all well and good, but you cannot even enter it without the CAPID of an evaluator for the SQTR.

The qualification isn't done until the paperwork is done.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Jeff-

We did enter the quals. We used NBB/CC CAPID on the online SQTR.

Then the quals went to Group. Validated.

Then the quals went to Wing.

NOT validated, cannot do all stuff in one day. Disregarding the Participation Letter.

Flyer

[Eclipse]

Jeff-

We did enter the quals. We used NBB/CC CAPID on the online SQTR.

Then the quals went to Group. Validated approved.

Then the quals went to Wing.

NOT validated approved, cannot do all stuff in one day. Disregarding the Participation Letter.

Flyer

Only for clarity's sake, tasks are "validated" by the respective SET, the full qualifications are "approved" (or not).

As for the bolded, that's just silly or someone being obstinate, and should be cleared up with a phone call in less time than this thread,
especially now that it appears everyone involved is aware publicly.

No one but the SET of record should validate or not validate a task entered in their name, and a Wing ESO should be inclined towards approval
and only when there is a demonstrable issue should he disapproved things.   When things are "gray", I usually check in the background
instead of disapproving if only because when it's a simple fix, then there's no need to send it back through the loop.

As to dates, I don't like to see single-date sign-offs, either, but they happen all the time, not just at NCSAs and NESA.

[greatdane1945]

As mentioned in my previous post and at the bottom of the letter sent home with the NBB participants...Problems?  Send e-mail to address at bottom of ES participant letter and/or to nbb.es.2013@gmail.com with cadet's ID number so that his ES training records can be up-dated.  Willing to help but need specifics.

Thanks.

[Johnny Yuma]

Jeff-

We did enter the quals. We used NBB/CC CAPID on the online SQTR.

Then the quals went to Group. Validated approved.

Then the quals went to Wing.

NOT validated approved, cannot do all stuff in one day. Disregarding the Participation Letter.

Flyer

Only for clarity's sake, tasks are "validated" by the respective SET, the full qualifications are "approved" (or not).

As for the bolded, that's just silly or someone being obstinate, and should be cleared up with a phone call in less time than this thread,
especially now that it appears everyone involved is aware publicly.

No one but the SET of record should validate or not validate a task entered in their name, and a Wing ESO should be inclined towards approval
and only when there is a demonstrable issue should he disapproved things.   When things are "gray", I usually check in the background
instead of disapproving if only because when it's a simple fix, then there's no need to send it back through the loop.

As to dates, I don't like to see single-date sign-offs, either, but they happen all the time, not just at NCSAs and NESA.

So the real problem is not the training that was doen, but the fact that all of the training was entered into WMIRS all at the same time.

Someone on your Wing staff needs their anal retentive breaker reset. Your squadron CC needs to take this directly to the CS or the Wing King for handling. This is about as idiiotic a reason for denying someone a 101 as I've seen.

[JeffDG]

So the real problem is not the training that was doen, but the fact that all of the training was entered into WMIRS all at the same time.

Someone on your Wing staff needs their anal retentive breaker reset. Your squadron CC needs to take this directly to the CS or the Wing King for handling. This is about as idiiotic a reason for denying someone a 101 as I've seen.

OK, I'm a Wing ES Training Officer...let me step you through my thinking....I've not received one of these to look at, but for some quals, yes I've denied for multiple mission participations on the same day.

GT/UDF/MS/MO/MP...no problem, you can have multiple mission participations in a single day.  For aircrew, I can even go into WMIRS and see if you flew a sortie, but for the most part, I'm happy to take the validation of your supervisor for that.

Staff and mission base quals are a bit different.  As a standard in my Wing, we tend to operate on a 24-hour operational period...It just seems that that's the number everyone uses.  That said, with a 24 hour op-period, it is not physically possible to complete multiple mission participation credits for a qual on the same day.

These sorties must be complete sorties and/or operating periods where the member participates in all aspects of their assigned mission specialty. It is possible to participate in more than one specialty on a given mission or day.

I've seen SQTRs come in with multiple "Participation" entries for MSA for the same day...with a 24 hour operating period, that's just not feasible.  Now you could do MRO and MSA on the same day quite easily, and that' won't raise a red-flag for me...but if NBB reports everything on a single day, that's going to raise questions that just don't need to be raised.  The NBB folks may find it more convenient, but for the approvers, it's instantly less convenient.

[Luis R. Ramos]

I can understand SETs denying multiple participation in one day. What I cannot understand is that there is written documentation on how the achievements were attained. On where he participated. And he still came with what he alleged.

Anyway, the issue was solved as just when my squadron commander was about to call him, apparently Blue Beret commander entered the qualifications, verified them, and approved. My cadet's record shows all three to be active. This was last Friday. I do not know how it happened, maybe he was a little behind, maybe he read the problem in this board, or maybe the cadet himself contacted him. I am not going to worry or try to find out how it was solved, just that it appears to have been solved.

And for next year I will take a good hard look at how I dealt with this situation.

Thanks to all who offered suggestions. I hope in the near future I will be able to offer advice as well...

Flyer

[Eclipse]

So the real problem is not the training that was doen, but the fact that all of the training was entered into WMIRS all at the same time.

Someone on your Wing staff needs their anal retentive breaker reset. Your squadron CC needs to take this directly to the CS or the Wing King for handling. This is about as idiiotic a reason for denying someone a 101 as I've seen.

OK, I'm a Wing ES Training Officer...let me step you through my thinking....I've not received one of these to look at, but for some quals, yes I've denied for multiple mission participations on the same day.

GT/UDF/MS/MO/MP...no problem, you can have multiple mission participations in a single day.  For aircrew, I can even go into WMIRS and see if you flew a sortie, but for the most part, I'm happy to take the validation of your supervisor for that.

Staff and mission base quals are a bit different.  As a standard in my Wing, we tend to operate on a 24-hour operational period...It just seems that that's the number everyone uses.  That said, with a 24 hour op-period, it is not physically possible to complete multiple mission participation credits for a qual on the same day.

These sorties must be complete sorties and/or operating periods where the member participates in all aspects of their assigned mission specialty. It is possible to participate in more than one specialty on a given mission or day.

I've seen SQTRs come in with multiple "Participation" entries for MSA for the same day...with a 24 hour operating period, that's just not feasible.  Now you could do MRO and MSA on the same day quite easily, and that' won't raise a red-flag for me...but if NBB reports everything on a single day, that's going to raise questions that just don't need to be raised.  The NBB folks may find it more convenient, but for the approvers, it's instantly less convenient.

24 hour OP period for staff?  Why wouldn't it be 8 hours?

39-3 says it should be 8 hours per sortie, no more then two in a 24 hour period for the SAR ribbon, which seems reasonable across the board.

Every mission I've ever worked had a 4-8 hour OP and that's how the plans were written, I don't think I've ever seen a 24-hour one unless
there's nothing scheduled during a long mission, etc.  It's pretty common in my wing to work as say a BD for part of the day and then go into
Planning or "other".

[Luis R. Ramos]

The last two SAREX my wing did, they had a mission run from Friday into Sunday. Some mission bases closed for the night. But Wing divided the days and nights into operational periods of 8 hours each.

Flyer