Re-screening CAP members

[RiverAux]

#1 slightly mis-stated things.  Most CG Auxies complete more or less the same background check as CAP members.  A relatively small percentage have to go through the same background check as anyone else entering the military.  However, those who pass this check don't automatically get any sort of security clearances.  If they receive a favorable determination and the job they're doing requires a clearance (perhaps working in a CG command center) then the CG can request that a Secret clearance be granted to the Auxie.  I'd say that only a small percentage of Auxies who have to go through the detailed check actually go on to get any sort of clearance.  

[PA Guy]

What I don't understand is why Coast Guard Auxiliarists have to go through a PSI and submit a SF-86, while Air Force Auxiliarists only have to submit an FBI background check. 

Why should CAP personnel get a free pass, while Coast Guard Auxiliary personnel are required to submit personal information and pass a security check in order to participate?  In the Coast Guard Auxiliary, you must possess a high security clearance to participate in the air program and directly augment Coast Guard personnel.  In CAP, no security clearance is required to participate in flying activities or to work with military personnel.

Doesn't seem right to me.     

Because CAP isn't covered by Executive Order 12968. 

Let's be clear on a few points. The CG Aux has 2 levels of PSI. The vast majority of members go through the Operational Support (OS) PSI which is about the same as the CAP requirements.  Aux personnel who augment the CG in some fields such as aviation and interpreters are required to undergo the Direct Operational (DO) PSI. It requires fingerprints and the completion of a SF86 and is quite detailed. Neither grants a security clearance. That is a separate process that must be requested by the CG and is quite rare.

[PA Guy]

Sorry Aux and board members, you type faster than I do.

[Eclipse]

I don't think that even putting them in patron status will help....since as far as I know, coming back in still won't require a background check if they were active before....but I may be wrong. On dialup here and not going to look it up in the dysfunctional Knowledgebase unless I have a need to.

Coming back from Patron status requires a background check - I had to do one earlier in the year - this was per Suzy at NHQ.

They would not release his records or return his status until it was complete.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Folks: let me interject in this topic with some real world thoughts.  I am the director of the largest and probably most active Counter Drug Program in CAP.  I struggle daily with the administrative burden of trying to get and keep over 325 people screened for CD missions.  The entry level screening is now taking 12-14 months to be accomplished and rescreenings are taking 5-7 months and those are only averages.  I have one guy with the highest security clearances in the land who applied in July 06 and his screening is nowhere near being finished.  If you would like to see CAP come to a screeching halt, institute those sorts of screenings for all members.  While you are at it, have all cadets be screened through the LE system: you really will see a decline in membership.

The FBI fingerprint check is just that:  a simple check to see if the person has any record with the FBI and the National Criminal data base.  It will only find those really bad guys and they, typically, are not going to apply for membership in the CAP.

Think for a minute about your Admin or Personnel Officer having to bird dog Form 83s or some other unborn form for every person in your Squadron.  Then, as has been suggested, have that happen at four or five year periods.  My experience has shown that even the motivated people who apply for CD can't seem to fill out a simple, one page form correctly.  I am probably spending 10 hours a week just trying to keep forms filled out correctly.

It is a great idea, but is likely unworkable.  I spent most of my adult life with security clearances of the highest kind and I know what it takes to keep those things current.  Multiply that times 56,000 members and you have an administrative nightmare of severe proportions.

There has to be a better way.

Paul:

I agree with you.  I do not think regular re-screenings will be workable, nor will they be cost-effective.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but I think all new members are run through an Interstate Investigative Index check.  The III picks up a hit whenever any person is figerprinted and those fingerprints are sent to the FBI.  Running III checks on suspect on my own cases as a policeman, you can get some serious information.  For example, a suspect is booked on a charge of drug trafficking, but is convicted for something else, that would and should be a red flag against CAP membership.  I have only seen one person in CAP rejected from membership based on the background check, and that was a guy convicted at a court-martial.  He didn't think that military convictions would show up.

[RiverAux]

What I was thinking about was basically resubmitting the application form and fingerprints to the FBI again on a regular basis.  That should not be anything like the initial or re-screening being done by the CD program. 

[Skyray]

If we are doing a Triple Eye and it costs twenty-five a pop, I have no heartburn with doing it every three to five years and charging the member.  As Gene pointed out, it is a mere pittance with the normal expenses of membership.

[davedove]

Granted, $25 isn't that much, but it is one more cost that the members would be asked to shoulder.  Even if it were paid, what is the cost benefit analysis.  It seems to me the funds could be spent on so many other things.

Now, stepping up the initial screening isn't that bad an idea.  But even then, what would that entail?  What would be the additional cost?  And what benefit would we see from it?

[Cecil DP]

Granted, $25 isn't that much, but it is one more cost that the members would be asked to shoulder.  Even if it were paid, what is the cost benefit analysis.  It seems to me the funds could be spent on so many other things.

Now, stepping up the initial screening isn't that bad an idea.  But even then, what would that entail?  What would be the additional cost?  And what benefit would we see from it?

I believe that the screening is cost free to CAP that the FBI was told by congress to provide the service and it is funded by the AF not by CAP

[Hawk200]

I believe that the screening is cost free to CAP that the FBI was told by congress to provide the service and it is funded by the AF not by CAP

That's a new one to me...

[Eclipse]

Granted, $25 isn't that much, but it is one more cost that the members would be asked to shoulder.  Even if it were paid, what is the cost benefit analysis.  It seems to me the funds could be spent on so many other things.

Now, stepping up the initial screening isn't that bad an idea.  But even then, what would that entail?  What would be the additional cost?  And what benefit would we see from it?

I believe that the screening is cost free to CAP that the FBI was told by congress to provide the service and it is funded by the AF not by CAP

Well, it doesn't really matter who pays for them, they aren't free, even if they are only internal soft cost to some Federal agency, and if CAP's requests start to increase geometrically, someone would squawk.

[gistek]

Most states have something in place for screening for people that work in schools. These are available through a person's local representative and may cost $10 or $20.

I have also heard that some CAP Units are requesting senior members voluntarily submit these forms, especially units located in "higher risk" communities.

I believe there is already a method in place for evaluating a member's continuing suitability that permits members to report objectionable behavior of subordinates through the chain of command and also permits skipping a link if the behavior involves someone higher in the direct chain.

Beyond this, perhaps a random re-check might be reasonable with the limit that if you are checked, your name won't go back in for five years.

[RiverAux]

I have also heard that some CAP Units are requesting senior members voluntarily submit these forms, especially units located in "higher risk" communities.

Are you saying that some CAP units are conducting their own background checks outside of the official CAP system?