Unit Continuity of Operations Plan

[O-Rex]

Our units have been tasked to draft a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP)

Basically it's a worst-case scenario: Commander & Deputy have been abducted by aliens, and someone out of the loop or further down the succession of command is taking over.

Usually includes rosters, points of contact, etc.

We'd rather not reinvent the wheel, or at least incorporate some "best practices," does anyone out there have one for their unit?

[jeders]

Nope.

Although I am in the process of writing up a number of memo's and OI's for the cadet side of my current squadron as I'll be stepping down as DCC and leaving soon, and no one here knows ALL of the ins and outs but me. However, the best plan to have is to train as many replacements as possible, in my opinion anyway.

[O-Rex]

Nope.

Although I am in the process of writing up a number of memo's and OI's for the cadet side of my current squadron as I'll be stepping down as DCC and leaving soon, and no one here knows ALL of the ins and outs but me. However, the best plan to have is to train as many replacements as possible, in my opinion anyway.

A common malady in the organization is that the leadership "bench" is not that deep, if you know what I mean.  In the military, officers spend their time & energies preparing for and seeking command-our orgainzational culture is a bit different.

Alot of the ''A/B players' have work/family and other committments, and then there are the 'C players' that you cringe when thinking about potentially giving them the reins....

Talking to commanders and old-timers, the challenge is to minimize the gap between the CAP you want, and the CAP you've got.

[Eclipse]

There is no line of succession below deputy commander, so if  the commander and any deputies are "disappeared" the next higher echelon has the responsibility to appoint a new commander, they are not appointed by the unit itself.  There is no reason that sitting staff officers should be expected to expand their roles or authority (in fact they can't) in the absence of a commander at the unit level.

(unless Al Haig is the ESO)   

There is also very little risk to operations in the absence of a commander - if its an extended situation then the responsibilities for approvals, etc., fall to the Wing (or Group) until such time as a new commander is appointed, but in most units ES and cadet activities could continue on their schedule.

I'm not saying that a plan to reduce chaos is a bad idea, as long as the expectations are set correctly.

[O-Rex]

if  the commander and any deputies are "disappeared" the next higher echelon has the responsibility to appoint a new commander, they are not appointed bu the unit itself. 

Funny you should mention it: it's the next higher echelon that's asking for this......

This is being done along with alert/recall rosters and a few other housekeeping issues.

The issue is that storm season is approaching (with the potential of members, commanders included, being isolated and out of the loop) and we have a unit where there is a mass exodus to the north in the summer, with the potential of the unit historian in the succession for command 

(no offense to any unit historians out there. . .  :angel:)

[fireplug]

It's kind of like your family emergency plan, but for the unit.
1- No CC? Notify next higher HQ. Is our radio network in place?
2- HQ unavailable? Where is our rallying point? We don't self-deploy, so how do we get word to our members?
3- Currnet rosters revised as needed, and in hard copy, and in hand of all staff members.
4- etc

[RiverAux]

I think what is really needed is a specific plan for CAP to check on CAP members in an area hit by a major disaster.  Specfic procedures to follow to contact members, check airplanes, CAP building, etc. and just what CAP will do once they determine that certain members have not been reachable through phone, electronic, or other means.  Should we send teams to their homes to try to verify their situation?  Personally, I think yes.  I see the above as CAP taking care of CAP. 

However, it does make some sense to me to have some sort of plan to account for initial actions in a situation where a disaster may take out the leadership.  Those who "take over" obviously wouldn't have any real authority, but there has to be at least someone in charge of making sure CAP equipment is ok at all times.   

[lordmonar]

There is no line of succession below deputy commander, so if  the commander and any deputies are "disappeared" the next higher echelon has the responsibility to appoint a new commander, they are not appointed by the unit itself.  There is no reason that sitting staff officers should be expected to expand their roles or authority (in fact they can't) in the absence of a commander at the unit level.

I disagree....we do not have a formal line of succession...like say the POTUS...but someone always successeds.

Even on Active Duty if only those on Command Orders (Q Order IIRC) are "commanders" yet in an emergency the highest ranking individual automatically takes over.

A COOP for a CAP unit should first just spell out by name or position the expected line of succession. 
Maybe a quick check list of what that person needs to do to formalise the change if necessary.

i.e.  Notify Wing/Group to produce the 2a for appointment.
Inventory accountable property/comm gear/real property/vechicles and sign the appropriate S reports
Sign new TCO signature verification cards
Review and sign financial statment from Wing Banking Program

[RiverAux]

I don't think its about automatic assumption of command authority, but more about ensuring short-term responsibility until command can be transferred.  If we're talking about a major disaster situation where higher HQ has no ability to contact the squadron and the squadron's offiical leadership is MIA or worse, don't we want some plan for who is going to at least temporarily be responsible for trying to ensure safety for squadron members and physical assets? 

[RRLE]

Should we send teams to their homes to try to verify their situation?  Personally, I think yes.  I see the above as CAP taking care of CAP.

The USCG Aux faced this problem in FL during the 2004 Hurricane Season (Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne) and 2005 Hurricane Season (Wilma).

A few warnings.

1. In the event of a real disaster, do not plan on being able to go to a member's house to check on them. The roads may be and probably will be filled with debris. If you are not an official emergency response vehicle you may be barred from going on the roads at certain times or at any time. A plan that is based on a physical check of member's is almost doomed to fail. If a curfew is in effect you had better be home or in-doors before it goes into effect.

2. If you insist on a physical check in your plan, then have the GPS coordiantes of all the member's houses stored on a computer and printed in hard copy. A real disaster may and probably will obliterate street signs and landmarks. Even if you can get on the road you might not be able to find the house.

3. Most of the members who could not be contacted did not have any method other then a phone to contact them. The Aux does have some ability to use Marine VHF on land but most members do not avail themselves of this. Nor would most of them try and implement alternative like CB radio, FRS etc. The Aux now has its own VHF radios but many districts are not even implementing that. Ask yourself very thoughtfully if it is right to expect one member to possibly risk injury to go check on another member who refused to even provide an alternative communication method for himself.

4. After group 3 above the second largest group of non-contactees were those who left town without informing anyone. Again you are putting members at risk to check on members who aren't even home.

Because of 3 and 4 above you really have to think hard about the risk of possibly injury (or worse) to the checkers and the very low probability that anyone will require assistance.

[Ricochet13]

Discussed this very eventuality at last night's squadron meeting with the new Deputy Commander.  Have scheduled this topic as a training subject in two weeks.

To address this issue of "who's in charge?" and capabilities to conduct basic operations, we'll address two issues.   

1) Establish a clear chain through all squadron members based on rank.  This is not to imply that rank indicates expertise, but simply who the next "go to" person will be.  That will be supplemented by standard operating procedures on which all squadron members have trained and certified.

2) Continue training in depth with regards to UDF, MRO, MSA, and MS/MO or MP, in other words, basic ES skills which all members of the squadron are expected to be proficient.

I've oversimplified what we're doing in the squadron, but so far it seems to be working.

[Gunner C]

There shouldn't be a COOP plan per se.  You should have a wing plan for contingencies such as terrorist attack, natural disaster, man-made disaster, etc.  Then each group should write their plan based on the wing plan.  Each squadron then writes theirs based on the group plan.

The plan is written and published.  When event hits, the operations plan becomes an operations ORDER. The 5th paragraph (Command and Signal) is where you address reconstituting the unit.  Paragraph 5a (Command) establishes the chain of command.  If the commander is incapacitated, dead, or abducted by aliens, the person next in the chain takes over.  BTW, this isn't an army thing, this format is used across the entire military - it is joint doctrine.

Unfortunately, CAP doesn't (normally) publish OPLANs/OPORDs in any recognizable format that is particularly useable. This is one of those things that we need to train our folks on across the board.

GC

[Tubacap]

^Having no real mil experience, can you post the proper, or acceptable format for these?

[Eclipse]

If the commander is incapacitated, dead, or abducted by aliens, the person next in the chain takes over. 

The above assumes a great number of things that are not relevant to CAP:

Consistency and competency of officers and enlisted (i.e. a baseline of training for all, respectively).

Grade which not only confers, but requires, lawful authority.

A reason for unit continuity.  This is not Lord of the Flies - CAP members do not find themselves in life-or-death situations where continuity of unit command is necessary - your rocketry day and cadet testing can wait until someone finds the building and the commander.

The only thing close is a Katrina/Rita scenario, and then the ES rules and regs apply, where GTL's, Branch Directors and above take over.  In a situation where you have no GTL's or Branch directors, your unit is likely not capable of independent operations and should stand down to self are until you receive orders from higher HQ, or things settle down.

Wings, groups, & units >should< have call-back rosters and plans for ES contingencies to execute out missions, which has nothing to do with unit command succession.

[Ricochet13]

The plan is written and published.  When event hits, the operations plan becomes an operations ORDER. The 5th paragraph (Command and Signal) is where you address reconstituting the unit.  Paragraph 5a (Command) establishes the chain of command.  If the commander is incapacitated, dead, or abducted by aliens, the person next in the chain takes over.  BTW, this isn't an army thing, this format is used across the entire military - it is joint doctrine.

Unfortunately, CAP doesn't (normally) publish OPLANs/OPORDs in any recognizable format that is particularly useable. This is one of those things that we need to train our folks on across the board.

GC

While this may seem like a minor issue to some, I wholeheartedly support what Gunner C has stated.  One systemic change which should be endorsed in CAP is standardization of OPLAN/OPORDs into a standard "Five Paragraph" format. 

Additionally, CAP needs to move away from over reliance on what, at times, seems an overwhelming number of emails to outline and direct operations.  This is not true in all wings I'm sure, but it is in mine

[Ranger75]

Maryland Wing has moved forward in disseminating wing-wide operational directives utilizing the five-paragraph field order format.  The Wing maintains a library of standing plans providing the operational framework for a range of potential missions.  Recently, Maryland Wing conducted a joint SAREX with West Virginia Wing.  MDWG ground team assets were transported to West Virginia by rotary wing airlift support provided by the MDARNG.  Drawing from a standing operation plan addressing how the Wing would provide mutual ES support to a neighboring wing, an implementing operation order and accompanying annexes were prepared.  I have attached copies of both  the plan and order to serve as one example of the direction that Gunner is suggesting we should be heading. 

[Ranger75]

A second attempt at attaching the referenced documents

[Ranger75]

Final attachment

[Ranger75]

OK, it's late at night and I'm having difficulty keeping my attachments straight.  Hopefully, this time I've attached the OPLAN.

[Gunner C]

OK, it's late at night and I'm having difficulty keeping my attachments straight.  Hopefully, this time I've attached the OPLAN.

That's the best I've seen in CAP.  You've still got a ways to go, but it is MILES ahead of the rest of the force.

GC