ES/Ground Team can wear whatever in the field?

[Ed Bos]

]Except for the requirement that a uniform be worn while conducting CAP activities.

Nope, check the regs, there is no "must wear a uniform during all activities" line in any reg.

GT task guide which requires you to be in a BDU uniform. 

That is what I'm saying. You have to have a uniform for that task, other than that it's not binding. The only thing mandating the uniform after you're signed off is the discretion of the Incident supervision (GTL, GBD, IC, etc).

[Eclipse]

nor is there a requirement to wear ANY uniform on missions.

Uniforms are required anytime a member flys a CAP aircraft, therefore they are required on any aircrew mission or training
(unless the customer requires plain clothes as in some CN missions), though I agree that no specific combination is prescribed,
it must be a proper CAP uniform. 

Ground Team Members are specifically required to wear the BDU uniform per task O-0001

2. The gear list below is the minimum required equipment.  Items required of trainees are marked with a "T." 
You may carry additional equipment subject to team leader approval and your ability to secure and carry it --
remember, you may have to walk a long way carrying it all.   
a.  24 hour pack
  1)  On your person:
      a)  Complete BDU uniform with BDU cap.  The BDU cap may be replaced by a hard hat
or bright colored cap based on mission needs.(T)

Urban Direction Finders are specifically required to wear a uniform per task O-0010, though no
specification is given.
2. The gear list below is the minimum required equipment.  Items required of trainees are marked with a "T." 
You may carry additional equipment if you would be added on to a full ground team at a later time but
remember, you may have to walk a long way carrying it all.   
a.   On your person:
     1)  Complete uniform appropriate to the environment in which you will be working.

I myself have made the same argument, recently, having forgotten this first part of the first task for GTMs & UDF trainees.
A member may not be released on a mission sortie without the required equipment.  The required equipment is
defined by the task guides, so clearly a uniform is required for the majority of CAP missions, at least for those in field and air operations.

[Ed Bos]

^ A good point, Eclipse, but if your GTL decides no uniform is appropriate (e.g., doing a line search in February in Fairbanks at -40 F), then that's the decision.

And that hold true to the furthest end of that line of reasoning, it's up to your mission CoC. As responsible CAP officers, I am sure they will make the BDU the uniform of the day 90%+ of the time, but they don't have to.

[jeders]

Except for the requirement that a uniform be worn while conducting CAP activities.

Nope, check the regs, there is no "must wear a uniform during all activities" line in any reg.

[W]hen engaged in normal duties as a CAP member

I would think that that line should cover GT members on a mission.

[Private Investigator]

It was discussed in the AFRCC class recently that Washington State is one of the few that do their own DF and air SAR, and therefore do not involve them
except in very rare circumstances.

+1

The state of Washington gives zero ($0) to WAWG and CAP so it is obvious they do not need help. Plus WA Sheriffs want to maintain their SAR budget. BTW the state of PA gives 1/2 million dollars ($500,000) annually to their PAWG. Just FYI ...   

[RiverAux]

Apparently some folks haven't read the almost 10-year old 39-1 which arranges the requirement for wearing a CAP uniform "when engaged in normal CAP duties..." exactly the same way it does the requirement for wearing them when engaging in the cadet program or when flying in CAP aircraft (which were the old requirements).

[Ed Bos]

Except for the requirement that a uniform be worn while conducting CAP activities.

Nope, check the regs, there is no "must wear a uniform during all activities" line in any reg.

[W]hen engaged in normal duties as a CAP member

I would think that that line should cover GT members on a mission.

Read Note 1. Line 6 clearly does not refer to missions, whereas Line 2 clearly refers to flying missions.

That would be a "catch-all" if it didn't go on to talk about meetings and conferences.

[jeders]

Except for the requirement that a uniform be worn while conducting CAP activities.

Nope, check the regs, there is no "must wear a uniform during all activities" line in any reg.

[W]hen engaged in normal duties as a CAP member

I would think that that line should cover GT members on a mission.

Read Note 1. Line 6 clearly does not refer to missions, whereas Line 2 clearly refers to flying missions.

That would be a "catch-all" if it didn't go on to talk about meetings and conferences.

How does commanders being allowed to specify a specific uniform type mean that no uniform is required. Note one is a non issue here.

As for the full text of what I quoted

when engaged in normal duties as a CAP member or attending local, wing/region, or national CAP functions (see note 1).

The word 'or' is of importance here. It means that when you're doing any of that stuff, be it normal duties or attending meetings/conferences, you wear a uniform. It doesn't mean only when attending meetings/conferences. And yes, I consider a GT mission to be a normal duty for someone who is GT qualified.

[RiverAux]

Since when is a mission not a "normal" CAP activity?  It is one of the primary reasons the organization was formed in the first place.

Frankly, anyone that claims that uniforms are not required on missions in general or at any time can't be trusted to interpret some of the CAP regulations that are actually complex and difficult to understand or are just saying so to cause controversy here. 

[Ed Bos]

Because your squadron, group, and wing commanders don't dictate how missions are carried out. This rule is for meetings, cadet field trips, conferences, professional development seminars, etc.

[RiverAux]

when engaged in normal duties as a CAP member or attending local, wing/region, or national CAP functions (see note 1).

The word 'or' is of importance here. It means that when you're doing any of that stuff, be it normal duties or attending meetings/conferences, you wear a uniform. It doesn't mean only when attending meetings/conferences. And yes, I consider a GT mission to be a normal duty for someone who is GT qualified.

No, "OR" means that what follows is entirely separate from what preceded the "or". 
But, in any case it still means that uniforms are required since missions are most definitely either a local, wing, region, or national CAP function depending on the mission. 

[RiverAux]

And please someone show up at a mission base during a SAREVAL and see how far they get before the AF evaluators laugh them out the door and back to their house to change. 

[Ed Bos]

I understand your interpretation. But the Note refers to the entire line, not just the second part. Your interpretation is ignoring that specificity.

[Ed Bos]

And please someone show up at a mission base during a SAREVAL and see how far they get before the AF evaluators laugh them out the door and back to their house to change.

I urge everyone to do that for next year's evaluation cycle, rather I urge every IC to have their GSAR units do that.

[jeders]

I understand your interpretation. But the Note refers to the entire line, not just the second part. Your interpretation is ignoring that specificity.

Yes it does, and I'm not ignoring it. Let's look at what Note 1 actually says.

The National Commander and other commanders may specify the wear of a particular uniform type
for the purpose of achieving a uniform appearance at squadron, group, wing, region, and national
functions. However, all commanders must be mindful of the objective of attaining a neatly
uniformed appearance at a minimum of personal expense to the individual member and will
consequently refrain from imposing unreasonable uniform requirements.

So, commanders may designate a specific uniform for the purposes of uniformity. It does not say that line 6 only applies to conferences and the like that you mentioned. It also does not say that commanders can specify no uniform. So as I said before, in this discussion it is a non-issue, moving on.

[Ed Bos]

^ It's because there won't be a cycle next year from what I understand.   

One important note... All Incident Commanders ought to be ensuring their personnel are wearing complete and correct CAP uniforms whenever practical. That's just sensible.

But the point I was trying to make is that it is a point for Incident Staff discretion.

And we should be celebrating the flexibility that allows our Emergency Services program, rather than occupy ourselves pursuing the defense of needless regulatory control with the minutiae of things like the word or.

[Ed Bos]

Jeders,

Feel free to move on, but this is referring to administrative control over events. This is different than operational control. Other lines refer specifically to operational (mission) controls. That's why this doesn't apply.

I think it's an important distinction, and I urge others to think critically about what the potential costs and benefits are for having the ability to dictate which uniform, or none, your ground personnel are wearing.

Respectfully,

[jeders]

Ed,

I can honestly think of no time in the past 12 years where not wearing a uniform on a mission would have done anything but hamper mission efforts. Not once would the lack of a uniform have made things any easier. And before you or anyone raises the safety card about cold weather, if you need to wear a non-uniform jacket to stay warm and dry, then wear it like any other piece of safety gear. But that doesn't mean that wearing jeans and a t-shirt under that civilian jacket are going to make the mission easier to complete.

Also, 39-1 applies to every member of CAP at all times. So line 6 does not lose authority just because the CoC changes from the usual everyday chain to the ICS/operational chain. It still applies just the same.

I am thinking critically about this, but you are celebrating a degree of flexibility in uniform choice that we a) don't have and b) don't need.

[Ed Bos]

I understand your point, and the safety concern is hardly irrelevant but that's not the main issue.
If you have a ground team assembled to assist in DR, perhaps in a CERT capacity, the CoC should not be turning away personnel because they don't have black combat boots.
The logical conclusion of this argument is that CAP personnel can participate on missions without a uniform in the rare event that it becomes a necessity. Shouldn't ever happen, but it can if we need it to.
Why on Earth would they regulation spell out flying in CAP aircraft otherwise?

[Eclipse]

Ed, there's no relief to "when practical", and there's no distinction between "missions" and "other CAP activities, certainly none you can point to as anything other than personal interpretation.

To your response to me - the task guide(s) don't say "unless you have a better idea" - they say the word "required".