Countdown to Armageddon

[Eclipse]

IS-700 is not required for GES....

Which just makes my point that it is not a rating, but a pre-requisite to begin training. 

and there is a duty position called driver...the only qualifications are GES and a CAP Drivers License.

Cite please...

[RiverAux]

And your cite saying that a person needs to have more than that to be a driver during a mission (since you made the claim first)? 

[Eclipse]

And your cite saying that a person needs to have more than that to be a driver during a mission (since you made the claim first)? 

A) There is no such thing as a "driver" in the ES curriculum.

B) The requirement to be involved in any mission, is that you are at least a trainee in the specialty you're are signed as.

So to have anyone in the field, with no further training than a DL and GES puts the entire mission at risk, need for muscle or otherwise. "I'll just stay in the car..." is the wrong answer.

Again, if it doesn't say you can, you can't, and it doesn't say you can anywhere in the 60-series.

The fact that GES-seniors driving cadets around, or GES-Cadets "helping out" at mission base is common practice not withstanding.

[RiverAux]

And just which ES specialty do you think is required to drive during a mission?  What further training do you think is currently required by CAP regulation to do this?

Since no specific regulation says what you have to do to drive on a CAP mission, under your theory NO ONE can drive a vehicle on a CAP mission.

[Eclipse]

And just which ES specialty do you think is required to drive during a mission? 

None, specifically per se, however proving a negative is rarely easy in CAP.  Show me where it authorized.
I can show you where all the "normal" specialties are trained and authorized, and I can't find a single one called "driver".

You have to be at least a trainee in whatever authorizes you in the field to start with, and have a CAP-DL.

For most cases that would be UDF-T, or GTM-T, because those are really the only ratings that train and authorize operations in the field.

Most else are base-ops positions that do not allow for independent field work.

[0]

Only thing i'm missing is ICS 300 and 400 and I haven't finished my GT3 requirements yet, still need First aid and another mission number.

Do you have any Command Level Positions?   If you don't you don't have to take the 300 and 400.  Those are just for the top echilon.  IC, MSO, AL, etc.

300 is for anything above worker bee. So in our realm, our branch directors and up need at least 300, and 400 kicks in for the queen/king bees.

Since I'm up at that level as an MSO, I forget who needs 300 and who get's the recommended *wink *wink deal.

[lordmonar]

and there is a duty position called driver...the only qualifications are GES and a CAP Drivers License.

Cite please...

IMU2

Also....there is no need to be a "trainee" inorder to be at the mission base...just GES.  You must have completed the Fam&Pre-req training for certain jobs to act in that capacity.....for certain jobs.....but "driver" only requires GES as there is no ES qualifications.

As for sending people out to "the feild" with only GES as a driver?   Why not?  Say you got a ground team with an 18 year old SM as GTL and 2-3 GTM cadets.....who drives the van?  CAP REGS say you must be 21 to drive...so you assign them a driver and get the mission done.  That individual stays with the vechilce....it is a legitmate way of doing buisiness.

Also there are lots of jobs at the mission base that do not require any other speciltiy.  The sign in person.  The "door guard".  The food/errand runner.  GES is the basic "get in the door" ES qualification.  It allows you be at the mission base and help out with the grunt work that requires no other special qualifications.

Don't get these grunt work duties with MSA duties.  The MSA is NOT a goffer.  They have a very important job and should not be used/abused by other mission base staff.

[Eclipse]

and there is a duty position called driver...the only qualifications are GES and a CAP Drivers License.

Cite please...

IMU2

Hardly a regulatory citation, if that's the only place you've seen it, then we agree there is no such thing as a "Driver" from a CAP ES perspective.

As for sending people out to "the feild" with only GES as a driver?   Why not?  Say you got a ground team with an 18 year old SM as GTL and 2-3 GTM cadets.....who drives the van?  CAP REGS say you must be 21 to drive...so you assign them a driver and get the mission done.  That individual stays with the vehicle....it is a legitimate way of doing business.

The team doesn't go.

If you're sending a Ground Team, then there is a specific level of training and equipment required to be on that team.
Who accounts for the personal comfort and safety of this untrained, GES only "driver" if things go bad and the team has to stay in the field overnight?  Instant liability.

You're going to leave the driver all alone in the car while the rest of the team goes on the hunt?  What if something happens to him?  GES doesn't provide authorization touch a radio, either.

This is the same argument we get into all the time about Chaplains and CISM people who have no field qualifications.

Also there are lots of jobs at the mission base that do not require any other specialty.  The sign in person.  The "door guard".  The food/errand runner.  GES is the basic "get in the door" ES qualification.  It allows you be at the mission base and help out with the grunt work that requires no other special qualifications.

Don't get these grunt work duties with MSA duties.  The MSA is NOT a goffer.  They have a very important job and should not be used/abused by other mission base staff.

Sorry, THE MSA rating was created specifically to allow less-trained and newer members who would normally not be allowed to play, to help after 911.  The door guards, escort and gofer jobs are specifically their purview.

GES gives you authorization to do nothing but start training in something else.

[Short Field]

MSAs perform adminstrative roles at Mission Base (see task P-2006).   This can include escorting people, signing people in, posting information, etc.  There is nothing to preclude using them to drive people around if they have a CAP DL.

IAW CAPR 60-3 para 2-3a:  The General Emergency Services specialty rating is required of all individuals qualifying in emergency services and will be completed prior to commencing training for any other specialty. This training authorizes members to attend missions, observe activities and perform administrative and general operations support tasks under the direction of qualified staff personnel, essentially as a license to learn.

There is nothing to prevent a person with just a GES and CAP DL from transporting a ground team and then staying with the vehicle.  I would have to call that "operations support". 

[brasda91]

MSAs perform adminstrative roles at Mission Base (see task P-2006).   This can include escorting people, signing people in, posting information, etc.  There is nothing to preclude using them to drive people around if they have a CAP DL.

IAW CAPR 60-3 para 2-3a:  The General Emergency Services specialty rating is required of all individuals qualifying in emergency services and will be completed prior to commencing training for any other specialty. This training authorizes members to attend missions, observe activities and perform administrative and general operations support tasks under the direction of qualified staff personnel, essentially as a license to learn.

There is nothing to prevent a person with just a GES and CAP DL from transporting a ground team and then staying with the vehicle.  I would have to call that "operations support". 

I agree.  You just have to ensure the member understands his/her role.

[Eclipse]

Its all about risk-tolerance, make all the edge arguments you want, but your teams should not be in the position that
they need GES-only members driving them around.

The perceived need is obviously a symptom of Senior-Member attitudes that Group ops (UDF & GT) are for "cadet" - I don't know where that come from, but up my way, the missions I go on are generally about 80+ percentage senior members, and they all have CAP DL's, so we're stuck in a position of hunting a driver.

Instead of putting the seniors you have at risk, you should be addressing why you don't have enough operationally qualified adult drivers.

[lordmonar]

Well you called it...

Risk-tolerance.  Given the level of risk...and the common sense approach to the possible risks....we need not use worst case scenarios all the time.

This is not a GTM=Cadet thing...but here in Nevada the majority of my GTMs are cadets.  This is about who can do what at a mission base.

There is such thing as a "driver".  Go drive this load of supplies to the airplane.  Go to the terminal and pick up the crew members.  Go drive this ground team to their drop off point and wait for them to return.  No need for GTM qualifications.....just GES and a driver's license.

If this is too much risk for you....then don't do it.....but don't tell me that I can't.....I got a mission to complete.

[Major Carrales]

Sparky - You're right that 300 & 400 are the hands-on training, however I disagree that we should bring this "in-house".

This is an opportunity for CAP to "take a lead."  If CAP members could conduct the training for the ES persons in their area, it could be a start to getting the name out and creating long lasting relationships.

CAP n

eeds to see the "agency agnostic model" that it gets today.  Bring it into CAP with no one from outside and we lose the outside opinions, the contacts, and the real-world of how CAP would integrate into large-scale ICS implementations.

I think we have plenty of "contrasting viewpoints" in CAP.  I believe in "protectionism" in CAP.  If we have to be beholden to others for our necessary training, then it that represents a serious flaw in out training. Basically a form of "unfunded" mandate," metaphorically a mandate with no attempt to offer the solutions for the mandates.

I suppose if its a matter of "do it in house or lose people", you have to "get 'r done", but I would not say that's the preferred method.

To me, the best method is the realistic one that works.  Waiting months and driving across the state for LE and FD personnel to conduct mandated courses is ridiculous.

I also find it hard to believe that in a state as large as Texas, with all the DHS activity you have with the borders, that there are so few training opportunities.  We're swimming in ICS up North, as long as you take the time to seek it out.

Texas, especially South Texas, is not Rhode Island where you can traverse the state by driving over three counties.   Houston is 4 hours from me, San Antonio is 3 hours, El Paso is 12 hours, Dallas is 8 hours.  Nearest "sister suqadron" is 2 hours away. Classes have limited slots, require unrealistically long drives and do nto occur often.  If I had a group of people in my squadron qualified to give the course, the problem would be solves.

Respectfully posted.

[RiverAux]

Well, its happened....the quals for everyone not in compliance with the ICS course requirements have been suspended.  My wing is mission incapable due to not having a single IC.  Lost about 40-50% from most ES quals.  More mission pilots than I had expected "survived". 

Looks like the system kicked out the ICs who hadn't completed 400 even though the federal compliance date isn't until September.  They might want to get that fixed quickly.

[Eclipse]

Looks like the system kicked out the ICs who hadn't completed 400 even though the federal compliance date isn't until September.  They might want to get that fixed quickly.

Relax - I just got a note from the my Wing's ESO - the above is a system glitch they are working on (though probably not right at this minute).

[Eclipse]

Further checking...

The WMU appears to take no interest in the ICS issue.

eServices is showing the "**" as indicated for quals which require a missing ICS class.

[wuzafuzz]

I found a glitch with 101 cards online.

In spite of the fact I completed all the necessary ICS/NIMS courses, all my trainee indicators dropped from my 101 card.  I was a trainee for CUL, IO, MS, and UDF.  All are completely missing from the 101 card online.  The required ICS courses do show on the card, so it's not a failure to enter the classes into eServices.

The specialties I am qualified for survived just fine, even those requiring ICS/NIMS classes.

Fortunately all of my SQTRT entries are intact and I have my 101 card printed last month.   

Check your 101 card in eServices and guard your old 101 card!

[Pumbaa]

^^ I noticed that at 2 am today!  geez I am 1 task away from completing a qual and it drops off my card. 

[isuhawkeye]

So, it is new-years day.  I understand that there have been a few glitches in the system, but what is the NIMS impact on CAP's mission capability??

[RiverAux]

Well, if you consider loss of a significant portion of our qualified ES personnel an impact on our mission capability, I suppose it is there.  And, I'm not just talking about the temporary glitches. 

By the way, I'm just pointing out a fact that we have to live with -- I actually support the requirements and think CAP actually hasn't gone as far as it should have to be in full compliance with the federal requirements.