Senior Rating Admin Officer Question

[West MI-CAP-Ret]

Question One:  Our unit (group hq) just completed our SUI, last month.  I was not involved with the coordinating of unit responses to, CI, SI OR SUI.  Is there a way around this?  Can the group commander, who actually did all of the coordinations, waive this requirement?

Question Two corresponds with the one before it, which is:  "...Explain to the OJT supervisor or commander how this function interacts with the same function at higher and lower echelons. Explain how you have complied..."

Have I overlooked a regulation that pertains to this?

Not anyone's problem or concern, but it's important that I complete the requirements for the Senior Rating for the Administration Officer. 

Because of the advancement of my Multiple Sclerosis, I believe I'm running out of time. 

I've been a member since 1974 (with a six year absence due to military service).  It would be a tremendous accomplishment if I could just leave with a senior rating (doesn't mean automatic advancement to Major, but can't see anything that could preclude this, especially since it would be awarded at the time of my retirement).

Not to make this into a "Hallmark Moment" but CAPTalk has been the most reputable and helpful unofficial blog on the internet.  One by one, I've left other CAP blogs because they were comprised of malcontents, bomb throwers, and simple complainers.  CAPTalk suffers no fools, which is good.  Captains need to know how to look stuff up without having their hands held, and the fact that there are dozens of Lt. Colonels and a few former national commanders on this blog, helps to keep everything running "somewhat" smoothly.

If anyone is attending the Michigan Wing's Conference up in Traverse City next weekend, I hope you look me up.  I also, for the first time in thirty years, will be attending the evening banquet, since it will be my last (just wish I could bring my lovely wife, Linda). 

DAVID J. D'ARCY, Capt, CAP (123070)
Group 703 Administration Officer

[edited for formatting]

[arajca]

On your first question, the commander is responsible for responding CI, SI, SUI responses. This cannot be waived. If you were not involved, it means your sections did not have any discrepancies, so no responses were necessary.

As an Acting Commander (before dropping the Acting part), while our commander had to leave to take care of some family health issues, I had to email all the responses to the IG who had the wing commander enter them for us, since our group structure was in flux.

[Spam]

Hi Captain.

Q1: (I feel your pain... have had COs who micromanaged it all themselves before). You are free of course to prepare a "supplemental response" to help address any areas which you feel were, lets say underemphasized, in his initial formal response. I wouldn't send it VFR direct to the IG, though... it needs to go through your CO to be uploaded to the IG system, and also communicated to the IG team:  "Hey, teammates... in follow up to Group 123s inspection, we have some additional amplification to help address Finding 4, etc."

Q2: First, a caveat, I'm not a DA specialist. However, the PD principle remains that you may have an OJT supervisor who isn't your Commander. Hopefully you'll have one (in your charter or not) who has a Senior or Master rating in your specialty. To that supervisor who is reviewing, you'll need to provide at a minimum the Book Answer/School Solution on how an ideal Group level DA would help process actions from lower commands to get them completed at Wing (talk about suspense tracking, about board scheduling, those sorts of things) even when your particular situation isn't normative at the moment. Perhaps getting someone who is NOT IN YOUR CHAIN OF COMMAND (i.e. your boss) could speed up answering and approving this checklist (since he could see this as an apparent challenge).



Last comment: sometimes the malcontents end up in charge (Boyd, et al)!

V/r
Spam

[Laplace]

On your first question, the commander is responsible for responding CI, SI, SUI responses. This cannot be waived. If you were not involved, it means your sections did not have any discrepancies, so no responses were necessary.

I think the requirement is to prepare administrative responses to CI, SI or SUI questions.  This is not talking about responding to discrepancies.  The Admin Officer should be answering the SUI worksheet and furnishing any deliverables that are required or necessary to explain the response. 

The Specialty Track Guide Senior rating requirement does not say it has to be submitted in conjunction with a real world inspection, or submitted at all for inspection.  If that was the case, unit/group Admin Officers would only a chance to fulfill this task once every 2 years?   

The submission of the proper SUI responses to the OJT supervisor will fulfill the requirement. 

[Eclipse]

The submission of the proper SUI responses to the OJT supervisor will fulfill the requirement.

I would agree, with the further note that completion of the work and requirements is at the subjective approval of the
Unit CC, so when he feels it's done, it's done.

As to the SUI itself, especially if you weren't directly involved for whatever reason, don't put a lot of effort or thought
into "amplification", just close the Ds and move on.  The last thing you or anyone else wants are drawn out discussions
about letterhead margins, or file plans.

Set it and forget it.