Achievement Ribbon

[Flying Pig]

Any word on the status of when we can start awarding it?

[PHall]

Is it even available from Vanguard yet?

[Pylon]

Is it even available from Vanguard yet?

Well, since an ICL hasn't authorized it to be awarded or even give procedures and approving authority for awarding.  There's also no guidance for where it goes in the order of precedence.   So if Vanguard were to suddenly offer an "Achievement Ribbon" I'd assume it would be mostly useless until these things were official (even if we could probably guess as to how most of these items will turn out)

[Cecil DP]

At the National Boards the subject of the "achievement" Ribbon arose and we were told that it was authorized, but that the certificates and ribbon's were still in production. You can recommend it and it can be approved at Wing or Group today. They just don't have the paraphernalia available.

[Pylon]

At the National Boards the subject of the "achievement" Ribbon arose and we were told that it was authorized, but that the certificates and ribbon's were still in production. You can recommend it and it can be approved at Wing or Group today. They just don't have the paraphernalia available.

Then whomever at the National Boards that disbursed that information has a very poor grasp of how Civil Air Patrol works.  Unless the National Board votes and issues a change to CAPR 5-4, ICL's or new regulations still have to be issued.  Just because the NB voted to approve something and it appears in their minutes never means that it is automatically authorized right there on the spot.  Some people love to think so.

[jayleswo]

[Unless the National Board votes and issues a change to CAPR 5-4, ICL's or new regulations still have to be issued.  Just because the NB voted to approve something and it appears in their minutes never means that it is automatically authorized right there on the spot.  Some people love to think so.

Uh, take alook at CAP Knowledgebase Answer# 1261 which actually states:
"The minutes and agenda items are available under CAP E-Services. Agenda items are in effect when approved by the national board/NEC. The minutes themselves are subject to approval at the next National Board/NEC Meeting."

-- John

[RiverAux]

The decision has been made, but no one can act on it until it is in the regulations as outlined by Pylon. 

[Pylon]

Uh, take alook at CAP Knowledgebase Answer# 1261 which actually states:

And we all know which side wins the age-old CAP forum debate about which side wins when you find conflicting information in published CAP Regulations and the online CAP knowledgebase...

[lordmonar]

Uh, take alook at CAP Knowledgebase Answer# 1261 which actually states:

And we all know which side wins the age-old CAP forum debate about which side wins when you find conflicting information in published CAP Regulations and the online CAP knowledgebase...

I vote Knowledgebase....but that is an argument for another thread.

bottom line.....

Other than the NB deciding to have an acheivment ribbon....no other guidance is available.

Standby to standby.

[DNall]

[Unless the National Board votes and issues a change to CAPR 5-4, ICL's or new regulations still have to be issued.  Just because the NB voted to approve something and it appears in their minutes never means that it is automatically authorized right there on the spot.  Some people love to think so.

Uh, take alook at CAP Knowledgebase Answer# 1261 which actually states:
"The minutes and agenda items are available under CAP E-Services. Agenda items are in effect when approved by the national board/NEC. The minutes themselves are subject to approval at the next National Board/NEC Meeting."

The KB is usually pretty good, but that answer is wrong. The NEC/NB have not been the governing bodies of CAP since 2000. For some items they have authority delegated to them by the BoG or AF & for others they don't. So, nothing is legit till it's updated in regs or an ICL, which means it's been approved up the chain - in this case by AF for wear on uniforms.

[Eclipse]

See AFI 10-2701 "Organization and Function of the Civil Air Patrol"

A1.2.4. CAP Governing Bodies. CAP controls its administration as a corporation through three governing bodies: the Board of Governors, National Board, and National Executive Committee.

A1.2.4.1. CAP Board of Governors. The Board of Governors (BOG) is the governing body of the CAP Corporation. The BOG is composed of four members appointed by the SECAF, four members elected by CAP, and three members from "interested organizations" jointly selected by the SECAF and CAP. The BOG has the authority to do any act necessary and proper to carry out the purposes of the corporation, including adopting and amending the CAP Constitution and Bylaws. In practice, the BOG serves as the strategic policy making and guidance body for CAP by reviewing and determining long-range plans and programs. The BOG also serves as a pool of expert advisers, oversees the CAP Inspector General and Membership Action Review Board, and supervises the CAP Committee structure. A detailed description of the CAP Board of Governors is contained in AFI 10-2702, Board of Governors of the Civil Air Patrol.

A1.2.4.2. CAP National Board. The BOG has left much of the day-to-day operations of CAP to the National Board, 67 members comprised of the CAP National Commander and CAP National Vice-Commander, the CAP wing and region commanders, and several other national level officers as well as the CAP-USAF Commander, who is a non-voting member. This group also elects the CAP National Commander and National Vice-Commander. The CAP National Board meets twice a year to conduct the business of the corporation.

A1.2.4.3. CAP National Executive Committee. During the periods that the CAP National Board is not in session, National Board powers are delegated to the National Executive Committee (NEC). The NEC has of 15 members comprised of the CAP National Commander, CAP National Vice-Commander, CAP region commanders, and several other national level officers as well as the CAP-USAF Commander, who is a non-voting member. This group has all of the power of the National Board. This group meets as required to conduct the business of the corporation.

Therefore, with the exception of powers specified as exclusive to the BOG, either the NB or NEC may, at times, create or change regulations, and how they are published is irrelevant.  They are in effect when the body issuing the change says they are.

[Pylon]

Therefore, with the exception of powers specified as exclusive to the BOG, either the NB or NEC may, at times, create or change regulations, and how they are published is irrelevant.  They are in effect when the body issuing the change says they are.

Except for the fact that they too are bound by CAPR 5-4 (unless they vote to change it), and they can't add items to the AF-style uniforms without approval from the Air Force (before or after the fact). 

That's why we wait for official guidance in the appropriate format.  Simply because the NB or NEC approved it doesn't mean that the AF has, or that all the fine details have been clarified and decided and formalized.  From our perspective of John Q. Member reading NB minutes, we simply don't have access to that information. 

[Eclipse]

I assume you are referring to the limitations on ICL's (180 days), and the requirement to publish a new regulation on anything intended to stay permanent within 90 days.

Both are anecdotally interesting, but not all that relevant to the same John Q.

The only thing the 180 might buy you is if you were disciplined because you didn't adhere to an ICL, and were disciplined after 180 days with no new reg.

The 90 days is something that a Compliance Inspection could gig NHQ on, but beyond that isn't really all that meaningful.

Should NHQ adhere to the rules? Yes. Should they be held accountable if they don't?  Yes.

Does that change the practical application of ICL's and supplements?  No.

[DNall]

Therefore, with the exception of powers specified as exclusive to the BOG, either the NB or NEC may, at times, create or change regulations, and how they are published is irrelevant.  They are in effect when the body issuing the change says they are.

Actually, just as a point of order, you have that backwards. The NB/NEC have ONLY the powers explicitly delegated to them, and only at the pleasure (subject to approval/veto) of the BoG. The BOG has all powers over CAP not expressly granted to the AF (in this case appvl of items on the AF-style uniform, but it would also include issues with real property, federal funds, financial tracking, etc).

In this case, the NB vote is subject to review by AF. This is one of those cases where that is mostly a formality, but we do have to wait for it to occur.

Except for the fact that they too are bound by CAPR 5-4 (unless they vote to change it), and they can't add items to the AF-style uniforms without approval from the Air Force (before or after the fact). 

That's why we wait for official guidance in the appropriate format.  Simply because the NB or NEC approved it doesn't mean that the AF has, or that all the fine details have been clarified and decided and formalized.  From our perspective of John Q. Member reading NB minutes, we simply don't have access to that information. 

That's right.

Should NHQ adhere to the rules? Yes. Should they be held accountable if they don't?  Yes.

Also an issue that's commonly cited as one of AF's frustrations with CAP.

An ICL could be issued allowing the ribbon to be awarded & stating the policy for doing so, but not authorizing its sale/purchase or wear until AF approval is granted. CAP/CC has apparently decided not to issue that ICL & let the AF consider the matter w/o making assumptions for them. I personally believe that's good politics, especially given our recent past.

[Eclipse]

Actually, just as a point of order, you have that backwards. The NB/NEC have ONLY the powers explicitly delegated to them, and only at the pleasure (subject to approval/veto) of the BoG. The BOG has all powers over CAP not expressly granted to the AF (in this case appvl of items on the AF-style uniform, but it would also include issues with real property, federal funds, financial tracking, etc).

Not quite: 

The NB has exclusive powers of its own:

The National Board shall have the exclusive power to:
a. Elect the National Commander and National Vice Commander.
b. Adopt regulations governing the removal of the National Commander and National Vice Commander.
c. Establish, increase, and lower national dues for all categories of membership.
d. Confirm the appointment of the National Chief of Staff, National Legal Officer, National Finance
Officer, National Controller, National Inspector General, and National Chief of Chaplain Service.
e. Approve Hall of Honor nominees and grant Life Membership.

[James Shaw]

I spoke with the Vanguard Manager about the award itself. I wanted to buy 1 for my colleciton. They told me that the 1st run was not good and that the colors for the ribbon were bad. I was told that the criteria is very braod and the order of precedence will be below the Commanders Comm. Like I have said before I only design I dont get the chance to do the "detail stuff" somethimes. I will see what I can find out.

[lordmonar]

Therefore, with the exception of powers specified as exclusive to the BOG, either the NB or NEC may, at times, create or change regulations, and how they are published is irrelevant.  They are in effect when the body issuing the change says they are.

Except for the fact that they too are bound by CAPR 5-4 (unless they vote to change it), and they can't add items to the AF-style uniforms without approval from the Air Force (before or after the fact). 

Show me anywhere in regulation, AFI, or law that says that?

The USAF veto on uniform changes is as much a traditional understanding as many of the things we do.

[IceNine]

aCAP members are authorized to wear CAP distinctive uniforms as well as
uniforms similar to the U.S. Air Force. Civil Air Patrol uses distinctive emblems, insignia, and
badges to identify individuals wearing the AF-style uniforms as CAP members. Wear of the
AF-style uniforms, as well as the insignia, badges, and devices worn on these uniforms are as
prescribed by the Commander, CAP-USAF, with the approval of Headquarters USAF.

Like this.

[lordmonar]

aCAP members are authorized to wear CAP distinctive uniforms as well as
uniforms similar to the U.S. Air Force. Civil Air Patrol uses distinctive emblems, insignia, and
badges to identify individuals wearing the AF-style uniforms as CAP members. Wear of the
AF-style uniforms, as well as the insignia, badges, and devices worn on these uniforms are as
prescribed by the Commander, CAP-USAF, with the approval of Headquarters USAF.

Like this.

Like I said.....it is CAP giving USAF the veto power.....there is NO AFI/AFPD or law that saiys the USAF has  that power.

[Eclipse]

Like I said.....it is CAP giving USAF the veto power.....there is NO AFI/AFPD or law that says the USAF has  that power.

Actually AFI-2701 says exactly that:

1.3.2. Uniform Wear and Personal Appearance. CAP members are authorized to wear CAP or Air
Force-style uniforms in accordance with CAP regulations (civilian clothing may be worn when specific
missions dictate). The Air Force controls the configuration of the Air Force-style uniform worn
by CAP members.

1.3.4. CAP Distinctive Uniforms and Insignia. The emblems, insignia, and badges of the CAP Air
Force-style uniform will clearly identify an individual as a CAP member at a distance and in low-light
conditions. The Air Force must approve changes to the CAP Air Force-style uniform. CAP distinctive
uniforms must be sufficiently different from U.S. Armed Forces uniforms so that confusion will not
occur.

(I was inclined to agree with your assertion, but was also pretty sure I'd read the above somewhere)