Changes to FROs and release process

N Harmon · July 27, 2009, 04:54:46 PM

See the Interim Change Letter:
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/2009_07_23_FROs_27815180D4D04.pdf

Link to FRO Course:
https://ntc.cap.af.mil/ops/dot/school/fro/

Comment: There is no mention if FRO qualifications will expire after three years like other Ops quals, or if it will be one of the "special case" qualifications. Either way, it is good to see some centralized management to the process.

Larry Mangum · July 27, 2009, 06:35:31 PM

I just retook the on-line course as a refresher, and I think they have improved it over the last time I took it.

RiverAux · July 27, 2009, 06:40:54 PM

I fully support putting it into Ops quals, but why wouldn't you still want it as a duty position? Don't you want something officially appointing certain personnel to do local flight releases at the unit level? Say I'm in a unit that has several generic FRO-qualified people, an IC, and OSC, and a AOBD. It appears that any of them would be ok to release my flight even the ones that are supposed to be doing mostly mission-related releases. Seems like a potential paperwork nightmare make sure you got everybody's stuff if there isn't a single FRO (with a few alternates).

I note that they seem to intend to cut down on the number of FROs, but if all the mission FRO types are valid to release any flight then they're probably going to see an net increase.

ZigZag911 · July 28, 2009, 04:26:49 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on July 27, 2009, 06:40:54 PM
I note that they seem to intend to cut down on the number of FROs, but if all the mission FRO types are valid to release any flight then they're probably going to see an net increase.

Under the existing system ICs, OSCs, AOBDs not assigned as FROs can only release flights for missions. I would assume some modification will be forthcoming to clarify who releases what, and when.

Short Field · July 28, 2009, 05:38:12 PM

Quote from: ZigZag911 on July 28, 2009, 04:26:49 PM
Under the existing system ICs, OSCs, AOBDs not assigned as FROs can only release flights for missions.

Cite please for OSCs and AOBDs releasing missions. I can only find 60-1 para 2-5d which is the authority for the IC or CMD to release flights on a supervised mission. I cannot find anything that authorizes a non-FRO OSC or AOBD to release flights on a supervised mission.

RiverAux · July 28, 2009, 10:33:10 PM

I've never seen an IC release a flight on anything but the smallest missions. Anytime there is a base staff set up its the AOBD or OSC releaseing them with the authority delegated to them by the IC.

Camas · July 28, 2009, 10:38:50 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on July 27, 2009, 06:40:54 PM
Don't you want something officially appointing certain personnel to do local flight releases at the unit level?

I was under the impression that only winglevel FRO's could do flight releases. Have I missed something? Just asking.

Short Field · July 29, 2009, 12:22:29 AM

Quote from: RiverAux on July 28, 2009, 10:33:10 PM
I've never seen an IC release a flight on anything but the smallest missions. Anytime there is a base staff set up its the AOBD or OSC releaseing them with the authority delegated to them by the IC.

Cite please. I am a IC2 and I have never read anything, been told, or seen anything that as an IC I can delegate my flight release authority. If you use the IMU, that "delegation" may be to give someone your FRO Password and Pin so they can impersonate you on the system.

RiverAux · July 29, 2009, 01:02:26 AM

Don't know about IMU as my wing doesn't use it.

How about the good old 104 which requires the signature of the pilot, briefing officer and "Ops/Clearance/Dispatch"? Doesn't say "IC". Haven't you wondered why we make AOBDs have FRO training? Why they are required to demonstrate several tasks identical to what FROs do to get qualified? Why they are the ones keeping the CAPR107, which is the mission version of the CAPF 99 maintained by FROs?

I will grant you that CAP hasn't done a great job in explaining this sort of thing.

If you are an IC on a mission with a multiple planes in the air and you are spending your time reviewing and approving each individual flight you might want to review the ICS system a little bit as you are micromanaging my friend.

Short Field · July 29, 2009, 05:55:00 AM

An IC running a mission had better know the CAP Regulations and had better make sure they are followed on the mission. Read CAPR 60-1 para 2-5d and it spells out who is authorized to release a CAP aircraft on a mission. If you don't have a valid flight release, then that aircrew is totally at risk - no liability insurance, no medical insurance, no life insurance and a potentially big bill for the family to pay for damage to CAP assets.

If I am running a mission and do not have a FRO available to release the flights, then I do it. I run legal missions - if a crew dies on the mission, their families will get benefits. AOBDs are required to complete the FRO course but the Wing is not required to make them FROs. I am not a FRO - I can only release missions when I am signed in as the IC. I have found no regulation that allows me to delegate that responsibility. Most times we have a FRO at the mission base - most of the time it is sometime one who is not qualified as a AOBD.

ICS is great - but it does not trump CAP regulations.

Short Field · July 29, 2009, 06:10:24 AM

The ICL seems to imply that AOBDs will be FROs - and not just for missions. I believe that is a step in the right direction. If the Wing does not trust a person's judgement enough to make them a FRO, then maybe they shouldn't make them an AOBD.

I can see AOBDs who will not want to be on the "on-call FRO" list as they will not want to get the 0430 call for a flight release when someone is just taking a CAP plane up for currrency.

RiverAux · July 29, 2009, 01:15:09 PM

Quote from: Short Field on July 29, 2009, 05:55:00 AM
An IC running a mission had better know the CAP Regulations and had better make sure they are followed on the mission. Read CAPR 60-1 para 2-5d and it spells out who is authorized to release a CAP aircraft on a mission.

All I can say is that we disagree on what the regulations say in this area. Seeing as how we have consistently gotten super grades on our SAREVALs while doing it this way, CAP-USAF both at state and region level obviously doesn't agree with you that an IC has to sign off on each 104 to make it legal.

There are inconsistencies in this area of the regulations that should be clarified.

KyCAP · July 29, 2009, 05:24:59 PM

Speaking of VALID releases.
If you read the letter then it is IMPLYING that after 10/1 that only if a release is entered into WMIRS will the release be VALID. no internet, no release.

Short Field · July 29, 2009, 07:10:06 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on July 29, 2009, 01:15:09 PM
All I can say is that we disagree on what the regulations say in this area. Seeing as how we have consistently gotten super grades on our SAREVALs while doing it this way, CAP-USAF both at state and region level obviously doesn't agree with you that an IC has to sign off on each 104 to make it legal.

I NEVER said a IC has to sign off on each 104 to make it legal. I SAID a FRO has to sign off each 104 to make it legal. The CAPRs give the IC FRO authorization on a mission. You are confusing the issue. Please provide a specific case in which the IC delegated flight release authority to a non-FRO. That would be an illegal flight release and needs to be identified up the chain. As I asked before, if you have a CAPR cite that gives IC's authority to delegate FRO authority, then please cite it. The regulations are clear on this issue.

RiverAux · July 29, 2009, 08:48:42 PM

And AOBDs ARE FROs on missions. Thats why the heck they make them take the course and do all the FRO-type tasks to get qualified.

Short Field · July 29, 2009, 09:38:43 PM

Cite please.

RiverAux · July 30, 2009, 12:00:19 AM

Well I already referenced the SQTRs and the CAPF104 to the SQTRs
But there is a key sentence in the ICL that started this thread that proves conclusively that AOBDs and OSCs HAVE ALWAYS had the ability to release flights:

It states that AOBDS and OSCs who currently don't have FRO training and don't get it done by 30 Sept 2009

Quotewill lose their qualifications and their ability to release flights on on 1 October 2009

.

That certainly proves that NHQ thinks that any AOBD or OSC was already qualified under the existing regulations to release a flight on a mission whether or not they have been designed an FRO under 60-1.

As I said earlier, this point is certainly not clear in the regulations, but NHQ has obviously used the same interpretation of what we have as my Wing has done.

Short Field · July 30, 2009, 12:58:43 AM

You sure reference a lot of stuff that doesn't direct or authorize anything. AOBDs have to have FRO training - they do not have to be appointed FROs. That may change with this ICL.

Let me help you with some CAPR Cites (paraphrased in a few spots for brevity):

CAPR 60-1 2-5a: A flight release is required for all CAP flight activities.

CAPR 60-1 2-5b: FROs are CAP senior members designated in writing as FROs by the Executive Director, region or wing commander, or their designee.

CAPR 60-1 2-5d: Flights may be released on a CAPF 99, CAPF 104, or CAPF 84. For Supervised Missions the IC or CMD is also considered a FRO and may release any flight related to that mission.

Please provide a cite that states a AOBD is authorized to release flights without being a FRO designated in writing. IAW para 2-5d, ICs and CMDs do not need to be designated a FRO in writing and the fact they are designated a IC or CMD allows them to release flights.

This is important stuff. I know of one mission that was not released correctly, the aircraft crashed and killed all three CAP members on board. All the families got were bills for damage to the CAP aircraft.

RiverAux · July 30, 2009, 01:09:27 AM

Did you read my last post which quoted the new ICL as saying that current AOBDs and OSCs would lose their ability to release flights on missions if they didn't complete FRO training? Doesn't this mean that RIGHT now they have that ability even if they aren't an otherwise designated FRO? Proves my point 100% in black in white.

Short Field · July 30, 2009, 01:42:38 AM

Come on and get real. What can you cite to show that non-FRO AOBDs and OSCs can release flights other than this ICL? It does not exist.

I know you want to read the ICL as the source document showing that non-FRO OSCs and AOBDs could release flights for these past many years, but I just read it as saying that if you have not completed the FRO training - you will lose your IC, OSC, and AOBD qualification. I only see the bit about losing flight release authority as applying to ICs, - since it was illegal for a non-FRO OSC or AOBD to act as a FRO on a mission.

ICL para 4: (edited for brevity) beginning on 3 Aug all qualified IC, OSCs, and AOBD that have completed FRO training online will automatically be listed as approved FROs, and to become an IC, OSC, or AOBD in the future the member will have to be a qualified FRO. ICs, OSCs, or AOBDs that haven't completed the online FRO training course by 30 September 2009 or are not qualified FROs will lose their qualifications and the ability to release flights on 1 October 2009. However, once they complete the training and/or are approved as an FRO their qualifications will be reinstated.