ICUT is coming soon! Morning, Night, or Noon!

[Theodore]

This is sort of a repost of a past thread, but, ICUT is becoming more mandatory in CAP.

[Майор Хаткевич]

What?

[Fubar]

Pretty much every entry-level emergency services qualification requires ICUT, so if you're going to do anything in ES, you'll need ICUT (BCUT and ACUT no longer are accepted as alternatives).

Additionally, if you're using radios to help facilitate your meetings or squadron activities, anyone with a radio in their hand will need to have completed ICUT.

So no, it's not mandatory in relation to being a member of CAP, but it's required for a number of things you may want to do in CAP.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Pretty much every entry-level emergency services qualification requires ICUT, so if you're going to do anything in ES, you'll need ICUT (BCUT and ACUT no longer are accepted as alternatives).

Additionally, if you're using radios to help facilitate your meetings or squadron activities, anyone with a radio in their hand will need to have completed ICUT.

So no, it's not mandatory in relation to being a member of CAP, but it's required for a number of things you may want to do in CAP.

How is this different from last week?

[SarDragon]

This is sort of a repost of a past thread, but, ICUT is becoming more mandatory in CAP.

Read the dates on threads before you reply or comment.

[Fubar]

How is this different from last week?

I was simply attempting to answer his question. I assure you, I had no intention of offending anyone.

[lordmonar]

ICUT should be required for GES.  And First Aid Training, air craft handling video, and everything in in MSA.

But yeah....it's kind of old news.

[almostspaatz]

ICUT should be required for GES.  And First Aid Training, air craft handling video, and everything in in MSA.

I second this...Cadet Snuffy shouldn't be coming out into the field trying to learn GTM3 when he hasn't already learned ICUT and "Basic Communications procedures for ES Operations" (Both are considered Advanced training instead of Prereqs) But that's just my personal opinion.....

[Spaceman3750]

ICUT should be required for GES.  And First Aid Training, air craft handling video, and everything in in MSA.

I second this...Cadet Snuffy shouldn't be coming out into the field trying to learn GTM3 when he hasn't already learned ICUT and "Basic Communications procedures for ES Operations" (Both are considered Advanced training instead of Prereqs) But that's just my personal opinion.....

I usually don't need more people to operate the one radio. I usually do need more people to search.

Radio communication is the tool by which we stay connected to the rest of the mission, and is not an integral part of the search itself.

[Storm Chaser]

ICUT is a requirement to use a radio unsupervised. Any GTM3 trainee would be operating the radio under the supervision of the GTL. As long as the member is not using a radio unsupervised, ICUT is not a requirement, hence why it's only a prerequisite for MRO.

[Holding Pattern]

ICUT is a requirement to use a radio unsupervised. Any GTM3 trainee would be operating the radio under the supervision of the GTL. As long as the member is not using a radio unsupervised, ICUT is not a requirement, hence why it's only a prerequisite for MRO.

In CAPR 100-1, the only provisions I'm seeing for supervised operation is 5.6, and that doesn't apply to CAP members.

Also, given just how easy it is to run people through ICUT, it seems prudent to just get everyone through it and have it done. Then you never have to worry about it.

[Storm Chaser]

ICUT is a requirement to use a radio unsupervised. Any GTM3 trainee would be operating the radio under the supervision of the GTL. As long as the member is not using a radio unsupervised, ICUT is not a requirement, hence why it's only a prerequisite for MRO.

In CAPR 100-1, the only provisions I'm seeing for supervised operation is 5.6, and that doesn't apply to CAP members.

Also, given just how easy it is to run people through ICUT, it seems prudent to just get everyone through it and have it done. Then you never have to worry about it.

Read CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1.

Prudent or not, the regulation is clear on the requirement. You can train everyone in ICUT, but you shouldn't prevent anyone from participating in a mission because they don't have it yet.

[Holding Pattern]

ICUT is a requirement to use a radio unsupervised. Any GTM3 trainee would be operating the radio under the supervision of the GTL. As long as the member is not using a radio unsupervised, ICUT is not a requirement, hence why it's only a prerequisite for MRO.

In CAPR 100-1, the only provisions I'm seeing for supervised operation is 5.6, and that doesn't apply to CAP members.

Also, given just how easy it is to run people through ICUT, it seems prudent to just get everyone through it and have it done. Then you never have to worry about it.

Read CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1.

Prudent or not, the regulation is clear on the requirement. You can train everyone in ICUT, but you shouldn't prevent anyone from participating in a mission because they don't have it yet.

5.2.1. All members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training.

I'm aware of that. But you positioned "supervised operation" of radios as a workaround to ICUT. That doesn't seem to be supported in the regs. A trainee without ICUT would simply verbally give his data to someone with ICUT and a radio to get the message out, not use the radio under the supervision of someone with ICUT.

[Storm Chaser]

ICUT is a requirement to use a radio unsupervised. Any GTM3 trainee would be operating the radio under the supervision of the GTL. As long as the member is not using a radio unsupervised, ICUT is not a requirement, hence why it's only a prerequisite for MRO.

In CAPR 100-1, the only provisions I'm seeing for supervised operation is 5.6, and that doesn't apply to CAP members.

Also, given just how easy it is to run people through ICUT, it seems prudent to just get everyone through it and have it done. Then you never have to worry about it.

Read CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1.

Prudent or not, the regulation is clear on the requirement. You can train everyone in ICUT, but you shouldn't prevent anyone from participating in a mission because they don't have it yet.

5.2.1. All members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training.

I'm aware of that. But you positioned "supervised operation" of radios as a workaround to ICUT. That doesn't seem to be supported in the regs. A trainee without ICUT would simply verbally give his data to someone with ICUT and a radio to get the message out, not use the radio under the supervision of someone with ICUT.

That's not what I said. What I said was that the reason ICUT is not a prerequisite to participating in a mission or training for most specialty qualifications, as was suggested it should be, is because trainees operate in a supervised status, which takes care of this requirement.

[AirAux]

It was so much easier when all you had to have was a radio operators permit.  And guess what?  Communications worked back then...

[LTC Don]

It was so much easier when all you had to have was a radio operators permit.  And guess what?  Communications worked back then...

Quoted for Truth.

[lordmonar]

It was so much easier when all you had to have was a radio operators permit.  And guess what?  Communications worked back then...

And you only had to fill out a form to get one of those!

[Eclipse]

And you only had to fill out a form to get one of those!

Pictured - CAP member submitting Radio Operator Permit form.

[Spaceman3750]

And you only had to fill out a form to get one of those!

Pictured - CAP member submitting Radio Operator Permit form.

He got the beard waiting for the class.

[Luis R. Ramos]

He got the gray hair when trying to make sense of the regulations and posting in CAPTalk and reading all different interpretations.

[Storm Chaser]

He got the gray hair when trying to make sense of the regulations and posting in CAPTalk and reading all different interpretations.

So what makes you lose your hair then?

[Eclipse]

He got the gray hair when trying to make sense of the regulations and posting in CAPTalk and reading all different interpretations.

So what makes you lose your hair then?

Pulling it out when you get the "answers".

[Holding Pattern]

He got the gray hair when trying to make sense of the regulations and posting in CAPTalk and reading all different interpretations.

So what makes you lose your hair then?

Explaining the regulations.

[RogueLeader]

He got the gray hair when trying to make sense of the regulations and posting in CAPTalk and reading all different interpretations.

So what makes you lose your hair then?

Explaining the regulations.

For the 5^th time to the same person because they didn't like the answer and either:
a) hoping to wear you down into giving in
or
b) hoping the answer is going to change.

[Eclipse]

For the 5^th time to the same person because they didn't like the answer and either:
a) hoping to wear you down into giving in
or
b) hoping the answer is going to change.

Seriously, there should be a decoration with attachments for this.

[RogueLeader]

For the 5^th time to the same person because they didn't like the answer and either:
a) hoping to wear you down into giving in
or
b) hoping the answer is going to change.

Seriously, there should be a decoration with attachments for this.

No doubt.  I'd have 5 maxed ribbons for it.

[lordmonar]

And we started a uniform thread!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[C/SrA Ravlin]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

[Holding Pattern]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

[Storm Chaser]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision. How else would a Mission Scanner (MS) trainee complete Task O-2018, when ICUT is not even a requirement for MS qualification? A GTM3 trainee can also complete Task L-0002 before completing ICUT.

[Holding Pattern]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

[Storm Chaser]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

Then by your logic, members wouldn't be able to complete the tasks I mentioned above without ICUT. But as it stands, they can and do all the time.

Please site the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio, even under supervision of a qualified member, without ICUT.

[lordmonar]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

Then by your logic, members wouldn't be able to complete the tasks I mentioned above without ICUT. But as it stands, they can and do all the time.

Please site the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio, even under supervision of a qualified member, without ICUT.

Worse.....by that thinking.....a member could not complete ICUT Training.   

[Holding Pattern]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

Then by your logic, members wouldn't be able to complete the tasks I mentioned above without ICUT. But as it stands, they can and do all the time.

Please site the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio, even under supervision of a qualified member, without ICUT.

Worse.....by that thinking.....a member could not complete ICUT Training.   

Covered in 5.2, actually.

[Storm Chaser]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

Then by your logic, members wouldn't be able to complete the tasks I mentioned above without ICUT. But as it stands, they can and do all the time.

Please site the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio, even under supervision of a qualified member, without ICUT.

Worse.....by that thinking.....a member could not complete ICUT Training.   

Covered in 5.2, actually.

Still waiting for you to cite the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio without ICUT under supervision of a qualified member.

[C/SrA Ravlin]

Same thinking that allows a member of the Sherrif to use our radio in a SAR situation. As long as an ICUT qualed person is nearby and regulating the use of the radio...

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[abdsp51]

Same thinking that allows a member of the Sherrif to use our radio in a SAR situation. As long as an ICUT qualed person is nearby and regulating the use of the radio...

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

You are aware that the likelyhood of that happening is slim to nil of a sheriff using our net right?   Most LE agencies have their own nets and some of those are connected to neighboring jurisdictions and statewide. 

[Holding Pattern]

Same thinking that allows a member of the Sherrif to use our radio in a SAR situation. As long as an ICUT qualed person is nearby and regulating the use of the radio...

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

No. There is a reg for that too:

5.6.2. For the purposes of liaison communications, representatives of Federal, state, and local
agencies may occasionally operate CAP equipment without direct supervision. This would
normally only occur under situations where a memorandum of understanding (MOU) or other
formal relationship exists with that agency and where it is necessary in a contingency situation.

There is NO reg that like that for CAP members. That is the problem.

[Holding Pattern]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

Then by your logic, members wouldn't be able to complete the tasks I mentioned above without ICUT. But as it stands, they can and do all the time.

Please site the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio, even under supervision of a qualified member, without ICUT.

Worse.....by that thinking.....a member could not complete ICUT Training.   

Covered in 5.2, actually.

Still waiting for you to cite the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio without ICUT under supervision of a qualified member.

I'm still waiting first for the regulation that allows it.

[Storm Chaser]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

Then by your logic, members wouldn't be able to complete the tasks I mentioned above without ICUT. But as it stands, they can and do all the time.

Please site the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio, even under supervision of a qualified member, without ICUT.

Worse.....by that thinking.....a member could not complete ICUT Training.   

Covered in 5.2, actually.

Still waiting for you to cite the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio without ICUT under supervision of a qualified member.

I'm still waiting first for the regulation that allows it.

I've quoted it multiple times, but you refuse to acknowledge it. It doesn't matter. Your opinion is in the minority and several SQTRs support what's already confirmed by regulation and is common practice. You can lead a horse to water, but...

[Eclipse]

I'm still waiting first for the regulation that allows it.

Interesting.  I'm inclined to agree with Storm on this, knowing the probable intent, not to mention the history of the A/B CUTs and that
supervised use has always been allowed. Also, logically, as others mentioned, without that allowance, no one without an iCut could use a radio
for anything, including training, which taken to it's logical conclusion is impossible, since the iCUT for new users requires a practical.

But with that said, I maintain that CAP's regs are written to the exclusion of that which is not explicitly authorized, so on that basis alone,
no authorization for supervised use by none iCUTs exists.

The likely answer is that those writing the reg made the assumption it was in there, and never read it through thoroughly enough to realize they'd set up
a regulatory problem, which most people will simply ignore anyway, as they use their unlicensed, spectrum dirty knock off radio with a tactical call sign.

[Holding Pattern]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

Then by your logic, members wouldn't be able to complete the tasks I mentioned above without ICUT. But as it stands, they can and do all the time.

Please site the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio, even under supervision of a qualified member, without ICUT.

Worse.....by that thinking.....a member could not complete ICUT Training.   

Covered in 5.2, actually.

Still waiting for you to cite the regulation that prohibits operating a CAP radio without ICUT under supervision of a qualified member.

I'm still waiting first for the regulation that allows it.

I've quoted it multiple times, but you refuse to acknowledge it. It doesn't matter. Your opinion is in the minority and several SQTRs support what's already confirmed by regulation and is common practice. You can lead a horse to water, but...

No, you quoted the specific portion that authorized ICUT training to get ICUT... Not the portion that doesn't exist regarding using radios to fulfill radio tasks for SQTRs beyond ICUT.

[Holding Pattern]

I'm still waiting first for the regulation that allows it.

Interesting.  I'm inclined to agree with Storm on this, knowing the probable intent, not to mention the history of the A/B CUTs and that
supervised use has always been allowed.

Allowed by previous regulation, or allowed by people choosing "common sense" over regulation?

Also, logically, as others mentioned, without that allowance, no one without an iCut could use a radio
for anything, including training, which taken to it's logical conclusion is impossible, since the iCUT for new users requires a practical.

That part (training) is explicitly allowed in regulation.

5.2.3. Communications staff member recorded in eServices at any level, including cadets, may
serve as mentors/evaluators. All mentors/evaluators must have completed ICUT and Skills
Evaluator Training (SET) before they may supervise performance of skills and procedures of ICUT
students. The mandatory standardized checklists and guidelines for mentors/evaluators may be
found by qualified evaluators in the Communications section of eServices.
5.2.4. Students completing online ICUT instruction or classroom instruction must demonstrate
required skills to a qualified evaluator, IAW paragraph 5.2.3, above. When a student has performed
the required skills and procedures satisfactorily, the student may enter the training approval in OPS
QUALS, similar to conventional ES training. Although a separate section of OPS QUALS is
provided for Communications training, the training will cross-reference into ES training SQTRs.
5.2.5. Local mentors/evaluators may deliver a "live" version of the ICUT course, showing the
training videos in a classroom setting, administering the written test and following the instructor's
guide found in the downloadable ICUT materials in the Communications section of eServices.
Any unit/wing/region/national Communications staff member recorded in eServices who has
completed ICUT, may serve as mentor/evaluator for the live ICUT classes. In live instructional
settings, the Instructor's Guide must be followed faithfully.

But with that said, I maintain that CAP's regs are written to the exclusion of that which is not explicitly authorized, so on that basis alone,
no authorization for supervised use by none iCUTs exists.

Except to train for ICUT, and ICUT alone. Not other SQTR tasks.

The likely answer is that those writing the reg made the assumption it was in there, and never read it through thoroughly enough to realize they'd set up
a regulatory problem, which most people will simply ignore anyway, as they use their unlicensed, spectrum dirty knock off radio with a tactical call sign.

I think it is more likely that this is similar to the issue brought up recently about people only keeping certain uniforms on hand instead of every uniform required to be kept by a member according to regulations; the regs are in fact clear, but people are violating the regs, and no one is going to enforce it.

[Storm Chaser]

You forgot this one:

6.3. User and Radio Authorization. Completion of ICUT, as recorded in eServices, and authorization to use an appropriate call sign, constitutes authority for unsupervised operation on CAP frequencies. Authorization may constitute a personally-assigned call sign, or a squadron, vehicle, or aircraft call sign.

The key word here is "unsupervised".

The having authorization to use a call sign part was added in the recent change, which makes sense. Nevertheless, the intent seems to be the same; a member needs ICUT to operate a CAP radio unsupervised, which means a member without ICUT can in fact operate a radio under appropriate supervision.

[Holding Pattern]

You forgot this one:

6.3. User and Radio Authorization. Completion of ICUT, as recorded in eServices, and authorization to use an appropriate call sign, constitutes authority for unsupervised operation on CAP frequencies. Authorization may constitute a personally-assigned call sign, or a squadron, vehicle, or aircraft call sign.

The key word here is "unsupervised".

The having authorization to use a call sign part was added in the recent change, which makes sense. Nevertheless, the intent seems to be the same; a member needs ICUT to operate a CAP radio unsupervised, which means a member without ICUT can in fact operate a radio under appropriate supervision.

No, it doesn't mean that. If it did, then the reg wouldn't have a carve-out explaining unsupervised AND supervised operation for non-cap members. It wouldn't have a carve-out authorizing ICUT training for cap members.

The lack of a provision for supervised operation EXCEPT for ICUT training AND the inclusion of regs for supervised operation for non-cap members leads me to one conclusion: except for training for ICUT which is explicitly called out in the regs, no cap member is authorized to have supervised use of cap radios.

Unless you are saying this is wrong:

But with that said, I maintain that CAP's regs are written to the exclusion of that which is not explicitly authorized, so on that basis alone,
no authorization for supervised use by none iCUTs exists.

One addition:

5.2. Introductory Communications Users Training (ICUT). The initial training for all CAP
personnel using CAP radios is the Introductory Communications User's Training (ICUT).


That line, combined with everything else I found, makes it quite clear that there should not be other radio training (such as for fulfilling individual SQTR tasks) before ICUT.

[Holding Pattern]

As it turns out, regular reading of the regs will eventually lead one to find the answer to a regulatory conundrum.

CAPR 60-3, 2-1 ,C

Persons attaining a qualified status under this regulation who will be using CAP
communications frequencies must be certified in accordance with CAPR 100-1,
Communications. Trainees do not need this certification when using these frequencies under the
direction of a properly certified communicator.

So, I was wrong. The answer was in a separate regulation.

I'm going to send a request up the chain however that the above be noted in the CAPR 100-1 as well.

[Brad]

Already there.

7.1. Requirements for Operating a CAP Radio Station. CAP radio stations are authorized by the Federal Government through the NTIA for emergency, training, and operational activities. Members are authorized for unsupervised operation of CAP radio stations IAW paragraph 6.3. Only active CAP cadet, cadet sponsor, and senior members are authorized to operate CAP radio stations. Other membership categories, such as patron, retired, or aerospace education members, are not authorized to receive radio operator training or use CAP radios without supervision.

Emphasis mine. What is section 6.3?

6.3. User and Radio Authorization. Completion of ICUT, as recorded in eServices, and authorization to use an appropriate call sign, constitutes authority for unsupervised operation on CAP frequencies.

Emphasis mine again. So, the way it reads to me is implies that supervised operation is permissible by the non-ICUT qualified member the same as it is permissible by the other membership categories, and I'm willing to bet that is the same answer you will get from NHQ/DOKP.

[Holding Pattern]

Already there.

7.1. Requirements for Operating a CAP Radio Station. CAP radio stations are authorized by the Federal Government through the NTIA for emergency, training, and operational activities. Members are authorized for unsupervised operation of CAP radio stations IAW paragraph 6.3. Only active CAP cadet, cadet sponsor, and senior members are authorized to operate CAP radio stations. Other membership categories, such as patron, retired, or aerospace education members, are not authorized to receive radio operator training or use CAP radios without supervision.

Emphasis mine. What is section 6.3?

6.3. User and Radio Authorization. Completion of ICUT, as recorded in eServices, and authorization to use an appropriate call sign, constitutes authority for unsupervised operation on CAP frequencies.

Emphasis mine again. So, the way it reads to me is implies that supervised operation is permissible by the non-ICUT qualified member the same as it is permissible by the other membership categories, and I'm willing to bet that is the same answer you will get from NHQ/DOKP.

An implication isn't a regulation. Written words are regulation. As I said though, 60-3 actually has the authorization as I outlined, which is what matters, but it should be also in 100-1. 100-1 explicitly defines authorization for supervised and unsupervised use by non-members, which is why I read the lack of explicit authorization for cap members for supervised use as "not allowed."

[Ratatouille]

Folks please remeber that you can operate any CAP radio without being ICUT certified. As long as a ICUT rated member is there, you can and in most cases will operate a radio depending on the mission.

Can you provide the regulation and paragraph that explicitly allows for this? Because I can't find it.

Seriously? We already discussed and settled this.

If "[a]ll members with duties requiring unsupervised operation of radios on CAP frequencies must complete ICUT training" (CAPR 100-1, Para. 5.2.1), then members without ICUT can do so under appropriate supervision.

If they made regulatory provisions for "supervised" operation by non-cap members, it seems odd that they wouldn't put in those provisions as well for cap members without ICUT. The lack thereof indicates to me that "supervised" radio operations aren't a thing, especially considering the exceptionally low bar of entry for ICUT.

A plain reading of the reg clearly infers that ICUT is not required for supervised use of CAP radios.

This is what happens when regulations meant for non-lawyers are written by lawyers. When reading legal materials, you must assume the following:
1) that every word matters
2) every word is included for a reason
3) lawyers are lazy and will avoid extra writing if possible.

If the lawyer who wrote CAPR 100-1 wanted to say "you cannot use any radios until you have ICUT", he would have simply written that. But he didn't, he said "ICUT is required for unsupervised use of CAP radios". The word "unsupervised" is included for a reason. What reason? To tell the reader that ICUT is not required for supervised use of the radios.

The lawyer could have added an extra sentence or two saying "unsupervised is defined as not in the presence of an ICUT-rated member" or "non-ICUT-rated members may use a radio under supervision of an ICUT-rated member", but that would have taken extra time, and would have been superfluous. It would have been superfluous because saying "ICUT is required for unsupervised use" is also saying "ICUT is not required for supervised use".

Take for example, a law saying "drivers of non-emergency vehicles must follow the speed limit". If you are a driver of a non-emergency vehicle, you obviously have to follow the speed limit. If you are driving an emergency vehicle, then you need not follow the speed limit, even absent a law specifically saying "emergency vehicles need not follow the speed limit".

Another example, a regulation that says "red baseball caps may be worn with the blue flight suit". Every word matters and is there for a reason, so with this short sentence, you can see that blue caps may not be worn with the blue flight suit, and that red baseball caps are not allowed with the green flight suit. It is not necessary to say "blue, yellow, purple, beige, green, etc, etc, caps not allowed with the blue flight suit" or to say "red baseball caps are not allowed with the green flight suit". Same goes with the inverse regulation "red baseball caps are not allowed with the blue flight suit". With this reg, then baseball caps of any color other than red are allowed with the blue flight suit without requiring a list of all allowed colors.

Would it be nice if regulations were written in "plain English"? Yes! Is it likely to happen? No, because the point of "legaleze" is to be as precise as possible while at the same time anticipating edge cases that would be impossible for a single writer to imagine.

-A Lawyer

[RogueLeader]

You do realize that a vast majority of CAP regs are NOT written by lawyers.  While they are, or at least should be, looked over by lawyers and other staff; most of the regulations are written by ordinary folks that get tapped to help.  I would suspect that many of members so tapped are found at National Staff College.

Just like many of the National Staff are unpaid professionals just like us at the local level (there's only 80 some paid staff at NHQ.)  In fact, most still serve at the local level like you and me.

[Eclipse]

At the end of the day.

There is no reason every member should not have an ICUT.  It's easy, mostly online, the practical is simple, and
the pinch-point restrictions on the evaluators are gone.

[Luis R. Ramos]

I am still waiting for members to get into a discussion about which uniforms should be worn while taking ICUT...

About which uniforms to wear while supervising non-ICUT holders...

...Just to turn this thread into a uniform one...

[vorteks]

I am still waiting for members to get into a discussion about which uniforms should be worn while taking ICUT...

About which uniforms to wear while supervising non-ICUT holders...

...Just to turn this thread into a uniform one...

[Luis R. Ramos]

Not laugh, but something? Yes.

People always complain "All threads in here turn into uniforms..." Most others celebrate when a thread is changed into a uniform thread...

I am just providing a spark... Or ruminating...

So why complain when I try to change it into a uniform thread, and celebrate when others do change a thread into a uniform one?

[etodd]

Funny was watching the ICUT videos. When the guy actually said ... "Be careful not to turn the volume knob too much or the sound will be too loud!"    ..... I was just trying to think of what kid over the age of two or three doesn't know what a volume control is?

I know, I know .... you have to make these training videos for the lowest common denominator. Somewhere out there was a new Cadet who had never seen a TV, radio, cell phone, etc. , who had never experienced loud sounds from a speaker. 

[Luis R. Ramos]

Or probably the speaker was thinking of the older Senior Member...

That one who seems to be more Senior than others...

Since like you said, any kid over the age of 3 knows how to adjust volume, and move around a computer, and other technology...

More so than most of us Senior Members...

[Eclipse]

Since like you said, any kid over the age of 3 knows how to adjust volume, and move around a computer, and other technology...

Just for grins...

How many knobs does your TV have?

Phone?

Tablet?

PC?

None of the above in my universe have any knobs whatsoever.

I've got some in the car, but increasingly those are going away in favor of touch screens, too.

Thinking around, anything I own with a knob is either outdated tech or a CAP radio (the latter portion of that sentence, I grant, being redundant).

[Luis R. Ramos]

Reminds me of a scene of one of the Star Trek movies, where the Enterprise goes to the past.

I think Scotty is told to use a computer. He picks the mouse up and talks to it...

Would our younger cadets know what a floppy drive was...?

Would our younger cadets know what a 3.5 inch diskette was?

Would our younger cadets know the original Star Trek series, Capt Kirk et al?

[Майор Хаткевич]

If they end up in an older CNC shop...yes. also tape memory...bleh

[lordmonar]

Luxury!

Punch cards and paper tape!   And don't you dare drop those cards!   

[Майор Хаткевич]

Luxury!

Punch cards and paper tape!   And don't you dare drop those cards!

One of our Okuma lathes is a year younger than me. 100 meter tape for memory is worth maybe 2 programs that take up 4-5kbs on a floppy...it also came with a tube TV "monitor" that finally started to really dim last year. Found a company in Canadia that did retro kits with LCDs, and swapped the TV out...now the control box is basically 1/2 empty. Still no luck on any way to upgrade the tape...

[RRLE]

Last Audio Cassette Company

[Brit_in_CAP]

Luxury!

Punch cards and paper tape!   And don't you dare drop those cards!

Oh, happy memories....don't drop the cards and don't tear that **** tape, airman!