Read Ahead Documents for Webinar

[JohnKachenmeister]

Proposal From:  Maj. John Kachenmeister, Florida.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:  This proposal would place CAP under the National Guard Bureau as its higher HQ.  The proposal places CAP wings under the operational control of state Adjutant Generals, but retains the Cadet Progam and Aerospace Education missions in CAP chains of command to CAP units from National Headquarters, CAP.  This proposal allows for maximum mission flexibility, and closer Air Force supervision.  Changes are also proposed in the role of the Board of Governors, and the National Board.

SCOPE OF PROPOSAL:  The proposal, if implemented, will require both regulatory and legislative changes.  This proposal will make CAP a functional element of the Air National Guard, and able to respond both to state and federal taskings.

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS: 

--  NHQ will be detached from the Air University and assigned under the National Guard Bureau.

--  CAP-USAF will remain a functional headquarters which will coordinate actions between the Air National Guard element of NGB and CAP.

--  CAP-USAF will also be the unit of assignment for all RAP advisors to CAP.

--  NHQ will continue the Cadet Program and Aerospace Education programs as before.

--  NHQ will propose new CAP regulations to the National Board, and promulgate approved regulations to CAP units.

THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS:

--  The Board of Governors will serve as the representative of the Secretary of the Air Force for management of CAP.

--  The BOG will appoint the National Commander and National Vice Commander of CAP.

--  The BOG will develop selection procedures and criteria for general officers in the CAP.

--  The BOG will, from time to time, provide policy direction to the National Commander, as the representative of SECAF.

--  The BOG will have the authority to remove the National Commander or National Vice Commander for cause.

THE NATIONAL BOARD:

--  The National Board will be comprised of all Wing and Region commanders.

--  The National Commander will chair the NB.

--  The NB will approve regulations for the operation of CAP.

--  Will develop and approve protocols for Region control of multi-state missions, to include temporary transfer of assets and personnel.

THE NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU:

--  Will exercise operational supervision of NHQ CAP, through the Air National Guard element of NGB.

--  Will approve or disapprove any regulations having impact upon the Air Force prior to promulgation, i.e., uniform policies.

--  Will develop appropriate NGB Regulations to enable and enhance coordination of CAP wings into state chains of command.

CAP REGION COMMANDERS

--  Will establish operational headquarters for their regions.

--  Will be prepared, on order, to assume command of the CAP response to incidents involving more than one state, i.e., multi-state SAR missions.

--  Will have the authority to transfer assets including personnel, vehicles, and aircraft within the region in response to specific missions.

--  Will serve as intermediary headquarters to aid NHQ in supervising the AE and CP programs.

CAP WINGS

--  CAP wing commanders will make immediate liasion with their respective state AG/Asst AG-Air.

--  CAP wing commanders will provide accurate and timely information on aircraft, vehicle, and personnel status.

--  CAP wing commanders will structure their wings to provide efficient ES support to the state, as well as geographical coverage for CP and AE missions.

--  Wing commanders will make certain that their wings are ready to respond to any tasking, and to advise the CAP Region and the AG of any shortfall.

--  Will respond immediately to state or federal taskings by appointing an Incident Commander, who will have full authority to structure a mission task force from available CAP assets.

--  Will advise the AG of any direct federal taskings that impact on  asset availability.

ADJUTANT GENERALS

--  Will attach the CAP wing under the command and control of the Asst AG for Air.

--  Will keep informed of the CAP wing's readiness status, including status of any direct federal taskings.

--  Will provide support, within constraints of other mission readiness, to the CAP in terms of office and meeting space, access to training opportunities, and use of ANG facilities for security of CAP aircraft when requested by the CAP wing commander.

--  Will approve any proposed MOU with Non-Governmental Agencies for CAP support.  (i.e., Red Cross blood and organ transport).

CAP UNITS:

--  Unit commanders will develop their members through individual training to a high state of personal readiness.

--  Commanders will administer the CP and AE program within regulations provided by NHQ.

--  Will provide such personnel and assets as are requested by a Wing Incident Commander in response to federal or state taskings.

--  Will make certain that any assigned equipment is also maintained in a high state of readiness, and will report any item not mission ready to the Wing Commander immediately.

MISSION TASKINGS:

--  AFRCC will have DIRECT tasking authority over CAP wings.  This is a federal tasking, and takes priority over all other taskings.

--  1st Air Force will have authority to task CAP wings on behalf of the USAF or any federal agency.  The taking will be through AG channels to the wing.  This is also a federal tasking, and ranks in priority directly below AFRCC emergency taskings.

--  Adjutant General taskings:  The AG may call up for a state-level emergency such assets of the CAP wing as he considers appropriate to mitigate the emergency.  This is a state tasking, and payment will come from state funds.

--  Adjutant General taskings, continued:  The AG can, at his option, request 1st AF to activate his CAP wing, and assign it under his control.  This would result in an AG tasking, but one which would be funded federally. 

UNRESOLVED ISSUES:

--  State commissions.  Officers of the CAP are entitled to wear officer rank by CAP regulations.  As assets of the state, they could be commissioned by the governor, but in some cases CAP regulations and state laws may conflict with regard to officer qualifications.  It is questionable whether such commissions are necessary, but this matter may be addressed.

--  State Codes of Military Justice.  If called to state duty, even if unpaid, CAP members would fall under state codes of military justice.  The effect of this on CAP and its volunteer status has not been adequately addressed, and will have to be considered prior to implementation.

--  Employment Protection:  Most states have laws protecting NG soldiers and airmen on state duty.  It is presumed that CAP, in a state role, would fall under the protection of these laws, but to accurately determine that an analysis of each state's laws must be made.

--  CAP Non-Combatant Status:  Since some state and federal taskings may involve combat support, a change to Title 10 is indicated to permit CAP to perform "Any mission or program of the US Air Force, provided that mission is carried out within the United States, its territories, and possessions."

--  The Posse Commitatus Act:  Since CAP would, under this proposal, be functioning as an asset of the Air National Guard, it is presumed that the PCA would not apply except in cases where CAP was activated federally.  A legal review, however, is indicated.

SUMMARY:  While at first glace this proposal seems to split CAP into a situation where it serves two masters, this is exactly the position of all ANG units in the US.  All can be federalized, all can be called to state active duty, and fighter units can be directly scrambled by NORAD in the same way that CAP assets can be called up by AFRCC.

This proposal provides for closer military supervision of CAP operations, more direct accountability of the National Commander to the SECAF, and exactly the kind of flexibility and agility that CAP needs to be on a wartime footing in the First War of the 21st Century.   

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.  Do you have any questions?

[Major_Chuck]

What becomes of the National Executive Committee?  Right now I see it as an redundant level of command that we are saddled with.

What role would the Executive Director, Civil Air Patrol play and who would he/she be held accountable to.

Funding.  Currently appropriated funding is part of the AF budget.  Would AF continue it's appropriation to us or would NGB have to increase its funding requests to cover us.

State Commissions or Appointments of Officers and Non Commissioned Officers.  I feel it is very important to have a strong NCO Corps comprised of current and prior service NCO's.

...my first thoughts...

Major Chuck Cranford, CAP
Virginia Wing

[RiverAux]

--  State Codes of Military Justice.  If called to state duty, even if unpaid, CAP members would fall under state codes of military justice.  The effect of this on CAP and its volunteer status has not been adequately addressed, and will have to be considered prior to implementation.

For this to apply CAP would have to be made part of that state's organized militia which currently includes the NG and SDF (if there is one).  The lfederal aw authorizing SDFs prohibits keeping any other troops so I don't see how CAP could be included here.  This doesn't necessarily prohibit the AG from being given operational control over CAP at the state level, just that the state military justice code could not be applied. 

-- If the AG has operational control over CAP in his state, how is it that the CAP Regional Commander will be able to assume control over multi-state CAP incidents?  If the AG's are in charge of CAP then any multi-state CAP mission is going to be made much more difficult since no one above state level would have the authority to command CAP "in the field". 

--

--  Employment Protection:  Most states have laws protecting NG soldiers and airmen on state duty.  It is presumed that CAP, in a state role, would fall under the protection of these laws, but to accurately determine that an analysis of each state's laws must be made.

It would not.  In some states the SDF isn't even given specific job protections under their state codes since the language is specific to the National Guard. 

--- Are you saying that the Adj. Gen will be paying for all state-related missions from his budget?  Many CAP Wings get significant "business" from other state agencies now.  The AG isn't going to want to take over funding those missions into his budget. 

[flyguy06]

Your entire proposal is centered around ES. It seems like you are suggesting two different CAP's one for ES that would fall under the NGB and one of rCP and AE which would continue under NHQ.
Also remember that NGB is a seperate organization from the USAF.

[DNall]

These are just "read ahead" talking papers of our presentations. Save discussion for the conf call on Thursday. Please! 

[Pylon]

These are just "read ahead" talking papers of our presentations. Save discussion for the conf call on Thursday. Please! 

Uh, what conference call?  Where?

And why should the mere presence of an upcoming conference call preclude members from discussing their ideas here, refining their opinions, and otherwise preparing their stance on your proposal?

[Nick Critelli]

FYI

AG = Attorney General
TAG = The Adjutant General
DAG = Deputy Adjutant General
TJAG = The Judge Advocate General  (top legal dog)

Nick

[JohnKachenmeister]

FYI

AG = Attorney General
TAG = The Adjutant General
DAG = Deputy Adjutant General
TJAG = The Judge Advocate General  (top legal dog)

Nick

Oops... sorry Nick.  I forgot you were a lawyer!

"The AG" in my proposal is the same as "TAG."

[JohnKachenmeister]

What becomes of the National Executive Committee?  Right now I see it as an redundant level of command that we are saddled with.

What role would the Executive Director, Civil Air Patrol play and who would he/she be held accountable to.

Funding.  Currently appropriated funding is part of the AF budget.  Would AF continue it's appropriation to us or would NGB have to increase its funding requests to cover us.

State Commissions or Appointments of Officers and Non Commissioned Officers.  I feel it is very important to have a strong NCO Corps comprised of current and prior service NCO's.

...my first thoughts...

Major Chuck Cranford, CAP
Virginia Wing

The National Commander, at his option, could retain the NEC as a management tool.  Headquarters operations would largely be unchanged, except reporting to a new higher HQ.

The Executive Director is the full-time representative of the National Commander.  His role would also be pretty much unchanged.

Funding would continue to come from the AF directly to manage CAP programs.  NGB may opt to request additional funds to support the additional workload of supervising another subordinate headquarters, though.

I do not see state commissions as vital to the program, but they are a "Nice to have" and would make some operations easier, such as administering oaths.  I also think that a vital NCO corps would be something which would improve CAP overall, but that consideration is outside the scope of my proposal, and could be instituted whether or not my proposal were adopted.

[JohnKachenmeister]

--  State Codes of Military Justice.  If called to state duty, even if unpaid, CAP members would fall under state codes of military justice.  The effect of this on CAP and its volunteer status has not been adequately addressed, and will have to be considered prior to implementation.

For this to apply CAP would have to be made part of that state's organized militia which currently includes the NG and SDF (if there is one).  The lfederal aw authorizing SDFs prohibits keeping any other troops so I don't see how CAP could be included here.  This doesn't necessarily prohibit the AG from being given operational control over CAP at the state level, just that the state military justice code could not be applied. 

-- If the AG has operational control over CAP in his state, how is it that the CAP Regional Commander will be able to assume control over multi-state CAP incidents?  If the AG's are in charge of CAP then any multi-state CAP mission is going to be made much more difficult since no one above state level would have the authority to command CAP "in the field". 

--

--  Employment Protection:  Most states have laws protecting NG soldiers and airmen on state duty.  It is presumed that CAP, in a state role, would fall under the protection of these laws, but to accurately determine that an analysis of each state's laws must be made.

It would not.  In some states the SDF isn't even given specific job protections under their state codes since the language is specific to the National Guard. 

--- Are you saying that the Adj. Gen will be paying for all state-related missions from his budget?  Many CAP Wings get significant "business" from other state agencies now.  The AG isn't going to want to take over funding those missions into his budget. 

As I pointed out, this is an unresolved issue.  I have not read the Ohio Code of Military Justice in a while, but it might be argued that if a military force were paid by the state to accomplish a state mission, then that force would be a de facto part of the Organized Militia.  This would have to be the subject of a legal review, and maybe 52 legal reviews.

TAG would have control of the CAP wing except those elements of the CAP wing called into federal service.  If activated by 1AF or AFRCC, the activated elements would be in federal service, and under the command and control of the USAF.  The Region commander could act as an agent for AFRCC or 1AF in calling up such personnel and assets as might be needed to accomplish the mission.  There must be a conscious effort to guard against a "Provincial" mentality (I'm Florida CAP, and I can't fly missions over Georgia).  We are One CAP, and when a mission involves multiple states, so does our effort.

Employment protection is another unresolved issue, specifically for the reasons you suggest.  The laws of the 50 states are varied, and a blanket statement that would cover CAP nationally cannot be made.

I did not address in the proposal the duty to provide CAP air support to other state agencies.  I proposed that TAG approve all MOU's with NGO's, specifically because of the potential for abuse of the CAP asset and the requirement that we not use volunteer labor and government-purchased aircraft to compete with charter operators.  There would have to be a liasion with the CAP wing commander and his TAG to determine how other governmental agencies would be supported.  There could be a direct MOU between the wing and the agency, or the agency could re-imburse the Adjutant General's Department in accordance with local fund transfer procedures.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Your entire proposal is centered around ES. It seems like you are suggesting two different CAP's one for ES that would fall under the NGB and one of rCP and AE which would continue under NHQ.
Also remember that NGB is a seperate organization from the USAF.

Yes, this proposal clearly addresses the operational aspects of CAP more than our other two missions, CP and AE.  This does not create "Two CAP's" since the missions are combined at the unit level.  It does however, create two chains of command which, while complicating the lives of unit commanders somewhat, is not at all different for the complexities of life as a National Guard commander. 

This had to be done for a reason.  A similar proposal was discussed some years ago as high as the Air Staff level, and was rejected, principally due to non-concurrences from the state Adjutants General.  Part of their objection involved reluctance to get involved in management of the cadet program.

I therefore structured this proposal specifically to relieve TAG's of the duty to supervise CP and AE programs, keeping them in a CAP-only chain.

We are asking, therefore, for reconsideration of a basic plan, modified to satisfy the objections raised about an earlier, similar plan.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Your entire proposal is centered around ES. It seems like you are suggesting two different CAP's one for ES that would fall under the NGB and one of rCP and AE which would continue under NHQ.
Also remember that NGB is a seperate organization from the USAF.

NGB is a joint Army-Air Force headquarters.  In my proposal we would fall under the Air Force element of NGB.  Funding would remain directly earmarked for CAP programs, and stewardship of those funds would be overseen by the BOG, acting on behalf of the SECAF.  NGB is the appropriate agency, since our ES missions largely mirror the missions of the National Guard.  The principle of Unity of Command dictates that all military forces on a mission be under the control of a single commander.  That commander should be the TAG of the effected state, and this proposal puts CAP within that command.

[JohnKachenmeister]

These are just "read ahead" talking papers of our presentations. Save discussion for the conf call on Thursday. Please! 

I don't mind a few "Warm-up" questions in advance.  After all, when you make a proposal like this, you have to remember that you are at a track meet, downfield at the Javelin-Throwing Event, calling for a fair catch!

[flyguy06]

So, how would this effect my Squadro? We dont do ES at all. No interest. But we stil want to be able to use the aircraft for O-rides and "honest" proficiency flying.

Also, I am in the Guard (ARmy side) and from what I know, the budgets of the NGB (Air side) and the USAF come from two different pots.

[A.Member]

So, how would this effect my Squadro? We dont do ES at all. No interest. But we stil want to be able to use the aircraft for O-rides and "honest" proficiency flying.

If you have no interest in ES, then what "honest" proficiency flying are you referring to?  We're not a flying club. 

[Pylon]

So, how would this effect my Squadro? We dont do ES at all. No interest. But we stil want to be able to use the aircraft for O-rides and "honest" proficiency flying.

If you have no interest in ES, then what "honest" proficiency flying are you referring to?  We're not a flying club. 

You have to have proficient pilots in order to fly O-Rides, too.  Mission Pilots aren't the only use for pilots in CAP. 

[A.Member]

You have to have proficient pilots in order to fly O-Rides, too.  Mission Pilots aren't the only use for pilots in CAP. 

I hear ya but that's pretty weak.  Unless you're doing all the o-flights for the wing, I can't believe there is enough business to warrant that - seems like that's stretching the spirit of regulations to subsidize someone's past-time.  Cadets are only allowed 5 powered o-flights for reimbursement.  They must have a lot of cadets...   

Seems that duty (o-flights) could be better placed with a flying squadron that is more interested in fulfilling the broader spectrum of flying missions.

My $.02139875 (w/interest)

[JohnKachenmeister]

So, how would this effect my Squadro? We dont do ES at all. No interest. But we stil want to be able to use the aircraft for O-rides and "honest" proficiency flying.

Also, I am in the Guard (ARmy side) and from what I know, the budgets of the NGB (Air side) and the USAF come from two different pots.

If the only flying you do is O-Rides, my recommendation to you would be to organize as a cadet squadron.  But even in a cadet squadron, there should be some attention to ES for the benefit of the cadets.  Perhaps your cadets, though, could tag along and train with with another unit.

You are right.  There IS dedicated, earmarked funding for the Air Guard.  There is also earmarked funding for CAP.  Both come from the USAF appropriated budget, though.  They have theirs, we have ours.  The will probably ask for more, due to the extra mission of supervising CAP.

[RiverAux]

Employment protection is another unresolved issue, specifically for the reasons you suggest.  The laws of the 50 states are varied, and a blanket statement that would cover CAP nationally cannot be made.

Actually, the easiest way to address this would be to get CAP included in the federal law protecting NG sodleirs while on federal duty.  If CAP is covered by the law on AFAMs (real and training) that would help a lot.  Once such a law was passed at the federal level it would probably be much easier to get changes made in state laws covering CAP on non-federal missions. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

Employment protection is another unresolved issue, specifically for the reasons you suggest.  The laws of the 50 states are varied, and a blanket statement that would cover CAP nationally cannot be made.

Actually, the easiest way to address this would be to get CAP included in the federal law protecting NG sodleirs while on federal duty.  If CAP is covered by the law on AFAMs (real and training) that would help a lot.  Once such a law was passed at the federal level it would probably be much easier to get changes made in state laws covering CAP on non-federal missions. 

I agree.  And if we step up and become as good as we were in WWII, I am certain that such laws will follow.