New CAPF 32 .. "Permission Slip".

[a2capt]

Really? What is this? Create more bureaucracy?

Every bit of information on this new form is information that is disseminated as a result of promoting the event, or collected on the CAPF 31.

Come on, people.  This kind of [mess] needs to just stop.


Someone doesn't have enough to do, hey, let's create -ANOTHER- FORM!

[arajca]

How many units have a locally developed permission form? How many have been reviewed by a lawyer? How often do units use the CAPF 31 for LOCAL activities?

My unit uses a local form that has not had a legal review. We don't use the CAPF 31 for local activities, since it is overkill for a one day activity. And our local form also includes all the information that has been disseminated in squadron announcements.

[Spaceman3750]

Required for all non meeting night activities under the new CPP.

[Eclipse]

Required for all non meeting night activities under the new CPP.

And it's essentially always been required, certainly that has been the rhetoric in our wing,
but few people ever do it.

For non-unit activities it's supposed to be reviewed and approved by the commander, and
for extra-wing activities the wing CC.

Same with the 17 for seniors.  I don't think I've done a 17 in 10 years.

[Storm Chaser]

How many units have a locally developed permission form? How many have been reviewed by a lawyer? How often do units use the CAPF 31 for LOCAL activities?

My unit uses a local form that has not had a legal review. We don't use the CAPF 31 for local activities, since it is overkill for a one day activity. And our local form also includes all the information that has been disseminated in squadron announcements.

Required for all non meeting night activities under the new CPP.

The new CAPR 52-10 allows for the CAPF 32 to be modified to meet local needs.

Units may modify the CAPF 32 to meet local needs, provided all data required on the national-level form is included on the local version.

[lordmonar]

We have used a local permission slip for several year in my squadron....no legal review required.
The only difference between ours and the new 32.....the "permission" part was on the bottom the parents kept the top part with the event information.

[Eclipse]

We use(d) a modified 31 because Spring encampment has no flight ops, so that entire section
was a waste or time, and the Navy needed additional permissions and information for the base MSA.

[a2capt]

There's been a new 31 that removed the two center pages, for a while now.

[Tim Medeiros]

Same with the 17 for seniors.  I don't think I've done a 17 in 10 years.

Interesting bit of info that often goes missed on the CAPF 17 is this nice little blurb at the top

Note: Use of this form is optional (see CAPR 50-17, para 2-7b2).

and the referenced regulation cite is

[size=78%]Note: Use of the CAPF 17 is optional at the [/size]
discretion of the activity director

Me personally, considering everything on that form is available in eServices and/or CAPWATCH, I avoid the thing like the plague and just tell people to get my their CAPID.  From that point I can contact the unit commander if I have reason to inquire about their approval and I can also see what their NHQ record says in regards to meeting pre-requisites for the course.


As for the the subject of this topic, can't say I didn't see this coming considering the multiple drafts of 52-10 mentioning it.  It's one less form and one less directive requiring its use for my unit to maintain.

[tgbriggs16]

Really? What is this? Create more bureaucracy?

Someone doesn't have enough to do, hey, let's create -ANOTHER- FORM!

Indeed. A major benefactor of CAP participation is cadet responsibility. If units are having trouble with this policy then they should have the option to use a nationally provided form-- provide the resources for people to use as needed, but trust the squadrons a little bit on this. I agree that locally provided forms are insufficient for those that need them, but to require that squadrons add paperwork will only continue to suck CAP drier and drier as members shrivel underneath the unnecessary forced paperwork. I hate being melodramatic, but this is becoming excessive.

[mynetdude]

Since the new 52-10 says we can modify it for local use

How many units have a locally developed permission form? How many have been reviewed by a lawyer? How often do units use the CAPF 31 for LOCAL activities?

My unit uses a local form that has not had a legal review. We don't use the CAPF 31 for local activities, since it is overkill for a one day activity. And our local form also includes all the information that has been disseminated in squadron announcements.

Required for all non meeting night activities under the new CPP.

The new CAPR 52-10 allows for the CAPF 32 to be modified to meet local needs.

Units may modify the CAPF 32 to meet local needs, provided all data required on the national-level form is included on the local version.

If that's the case howcome I can't add to it? MS word is refusing to let me type anything (although i can tick a few checkboxes) I just want to prefill some data (many other NHQ forms like CAPF31 have text field boxes you can type in, but not on the F32 which is strange...)

[Eclipse]

Since the new 52-10 says we can modify it for local use

How many units have a locally developed permission form? How many have been reviewed by a lawyer? How often do units use the CAPF 31 for LOCAL activities?

My unit uses a local form that has not had a legal review. We don't use the CAPF 31 for local activities, since it is overkill for a one day activity. And our local form also includes all the information that has been disseminated in squadron announcements.

Required for all non meeting night activities under the new CPP.

The new CAPR 52-10 allows for the CAPF 32 to be modified to meet local needs.

Units may modify the CAPF 32 to meet local needs, provided all data required on the national-level form is included on the local version.

If that's the case howcome I can't add to it? MS word is refusing to let me type anything (although i can tick a few checkboxes) I just want to prefill some data (many other NHQ forms like CAPF31 have text field boxes you can type in, but not on the F32 which is strange...)

It's probably format locked, just unlock it and then edit to your heart's content.
Most NHQ forms are like that.

[mynetdude]

Since the new 52-10 says we can modify it for local use

How many units have a locally developed permission form? How many have been reviewed by a lawyer? How often do units use the CAPF 31 for LOCAL activities?

My unit uses a local form that has not had a legal review. We don't use the CAPF 31 for local activities, since it is overkill for a one day activity. And our local form also includes all the information that has been disseminated in squadron announcements.

Required for all non meeting night activities under the new CPP.

The new CAPR 52-10 allows for the CAPF 32 to be modified to meet local needs.

Units may modify the CAPF 32 to meet local needs, provided all data required on the national-level form is included on the local version.

If that's the case howcome I can't add to it? MS word is refusing to let me type anything (although i can tick a few checkboxes) I just want to prefill some data (many other NHQ forms like CAPF31 have text field boxes you can type in, but not on the F32 which is strange...)

It's probably format locked, just unlock it and then edit to your heart's content.
Most NHQ forms are like that.

That's what I initially thought; but word would drop a yellow ribbon indicating that its read only and I just tried it from home; so it worked, not sure why it wouldn't work on the squadron PC

Thankfully I have access to lots of PCs

[Eclipse]

Could also be a version issue if you have an old version of Word at the squadron.

It might also be that MS-BS security "feature" that makes documents from untrusted sources read-only.

[mynetdude]

Could also be a version issue if you have an old version of Word at the squadron.

It might also be that MS-BS security "feature" that makes documents from untrusted sources read-only.

Both are not unheard of; squadron has the same version as I do since I'm the IT guy

I sent a copy of the form I have over to the squadron so I'll be checking it out tomorrow.

Never thought to check here at home before posting here but your help is most welcome