More changes are a comin'

[arajca]

The following publications are up for comment:

CAPR 35-5,CAP Officer and Noncommissioned Officer Appointments and Promotions

CAPR 174-1, Property Management

I haven't reviewed the new CAPR 35-5, but the new CAPR 174-1 - which will replace CAPR 67-1, 67-4, 77-1 (parts), 87-1, 100-2, and 900-6 - has some significant changes and it takes effect 1 Oct 2009. If you are involved with Logistics, Communications, or Command, I highly recommend reviewing it.

[Pylon]

One of the CAPR 35-5 issues they haven't resolved is E-3 NCOs becoming CAP NCOs.

CAPR 35-5, 6-2, a states:  "a. Only those CAP members who are military or ex-military NCOs and do not wish to be considered for CAP officer grades may be appointed to a CAP NCO grade under provisions of this section. The CAP grade granted will be equivalent to the grade held in the active duty military, Reserve, or National Guard."

Key pieces there:  Those who are or were NCOs; CAP grade granted will be equivalent.

In some services E-3's can be Non-Commissioned Officers.  There is no equivalent CAP grade now that "Sergeant" (which the Air Force equivalent is called "Senior Airman") has been eliminated.  So in the rare case of a current or former E-3 would like to be a CAP NCO, they are entitled to an equivalent grade but none exists.  Add a clause to make them all CAP Staff Sergeants or bring back the CAP Sergeant three-stripe NCO grade.

[Spike]

^ Mike, I have heartburn over this issue.  I had two E-3's (AF type) join the Squadron last year and they wanted to join as enlisted CAP members.  Instead they joined, we never promoted them to 2nd Lt (at the required 6 month time frame) but waited until they made E-4 in the Active Duty AF two months ago.

I also have had prior service and currently serving Army individuals want to join who only had E-2 or E-3. 

It is shame.  I do not understand the reasoning behind the requirement to be an (AF) NCO.

[Spike]

The property management reg looks more in line with other Government Agencies (which is needed).  It does appear we will be doing a few hours of scanning documents and getting paperwork signed once this reg goes into policy mode. 

[Pylon]

^ Mike, I have heartburn over this issue.  I had two E-3's (AF type) join the Squadron last year and they wanted to join as enlisted CAP members.  Instead they joined, we never promoted them to 2nd Lt (at the required 6 month time frame) but waited until they made E-4 in the Active Duty AF two months ago.

I also have had prior service and currently serving Army individuals want to join who only had E-2 or E-3. 

It is shame.  I do not understand the reasoning behind the requirement to be an (AF) NCO.

Actually, we're talking about separate issues.   I'm talking about E-3's who are NCOs in the Armed Forces, and are already entitled to CAP NCO grade not having the appropriate equivalent CAP NCO grade to wear.   You're talking about changing the structure by extending CAP non-officer grades to cover those who are Armed Forces personnel in pay grades E-1 through E-3.  Separate issues entirely.

[Spike]

^ I understand.  Little slow on the uptake.  I agree with you though. 

[NIN]

Mike, forgive me for being slow, but can you explain to me which military allows an E-3 to be considered a "non-commissioned officer"?  Because I'm reasonable sure that its none of ours.

[VPI18]

^ Mike, I have heartburn over this issue.  I had two E-3's (AF type) join the Squadron last year and they wanted to join as enlisted CAP members.  Instead they joined, we never promoted them to 2nd Lt (at the required 6 month time frame) but waited until they made E-4 in the Active Duty AF two months ago.

I also have had prior service and currently serving Army individuals want to join who only had E-2 or E-3. 

It is shame.  I do not understand the reasoning behind the requirement to be an (AF) NCO.

Actually, we're talking about separate issues.   I'm talking about E-3's who are NCOs in the Armed Forces, and are already entitled to CAP NCO grade not having the appropriate equivalent CAP NCO grade to wear.   You're talking about changing the structure by extending CAP non-officer grades to cover those who are Armed Forces personnel in pay grades E-1 through E-3.  Separate issues entirely.

With all due respect, sir, I believe that E-3 is not an NCO in ANY branch of the armed forces. E-4 are NCOs in the Navy, Coast Guard, and Marine Corps. Some E-4s are NCOs in the Army (CPL), while others are not (SPC). No Air Force E-4 is an NCO, and according to the reg, they are not entitled to CAP NCO grade. However, I believe the CAP equivalent for an E-4 NCO IS Sergeant, but using the chevrons for an SrA. Unfortunately, I don't remember where I read this... 

[Camas]

Not sure if this is on topic but I believe that only the Navy, Coast Guard and Marines do you have E-4's as NCO's other than Army corporals. I was in the Army at the time AF E-4's were "sergeants" and that was just a joke.

[MIKE]

I don't think Lance Corporal counts even in the Marines, and that is the only E-3 that would possibly.   What they should do is just drop the NCO bit and just include AB-SrA as equivalent grades for those that want to retain them.

[Spike]

^ Agreed!  Now if only we can get more people to support the idea. 

[Pylon]

Mike, forgive me for being slow, but can you explain to me which military allows an E-3 to be considered a "non-commissioned officer"?  Because I'm reasonable sure that its none of ours.

Doh!  Meant to be saying E-4 (needed more coffee today apparently to get with it).  E-4 NCOs (like USMC Corporal, Army Corporal are the ones without an equivalent CAP NCO grade.   CAP Staff Sergeant would be the equivalent grade for those who are/were E-5, but is the lowest CAP NCO grade available.  Defeats the equivalency clause in the reg.

[Cecil DP]

^ Mike, I have heartburn over this issue.  I had two E-3's (AF type) join the Squadron last year and they wanted to join as enlisted CAP members.  Instead they joined, we never promoted them to 2nd Lt (at the required 6 month time frame) but waited until they made E-4 in the Active Duty AF two months ago.

I also have had prior service and currently serving Army individuals want to join who only had E-2 or E-3. 

It is shame.  I do not understand the reasoning behind the requirement to be an (AF) NCO.

Actually, we're talking about separate issues.   I'm talking about E-3's who are NCOs in the Armed Forces, and are already entitled to CAP NCO grade not having the appropriate equivalent CAP NCO grade to wear.   You're talking about changing the structure by extending CAP non-officer grades to cover those who are Armed Forces personnel in pay grades E-1 through E-3.  Separate issues entirely.

NCO grades don't start until E-4.

[D2SK]

Instead of using ambiguous terms like NCO - why don't we just say what we mean...if you are an E-5 or above, you can wear your stripes in CAP.  Seriously, do we try to make stuff difficult on purpose?

[JohnKachenmeister]

Instead of using ambiguous terms like NCO - why don't we just say what we mean...if you are an E-5 or above, you can wear your stripes in CAP.  Seriously, do we try to make stuff difficult on purpose?

I don't know if they tried to make it difficult on purpose, but E-4's in the Navy are considered NCO's (called Petty Officers) as are Marine E-4's and Army "Hard stripe" corporals.  The Air Force USED to split the E-4 grade with some E-4's being SrA's and others being called "Sergeant."  (Remember the McPeak days of the Big Blue Dot on the chevrons?  NCO's got a white star, lower enlisted got an embroidered blue star on a matching blue field.)

CAP's enlisted rank structure has not changed with the Air Force's, which shouldn't surprise anyone.  We still have leather nametags on flight suits, plastic encased bright insignia on flight suits, ultramarine blue nametapes on BDU's, and propellers on our airplanes.

[Gunner C]

Reference CAPR 35-5:  There is NO such grade as CWO 1!  There is a WO 1 and a CWO 2.

Who writes this stuff??

[Spike]

CAP's enlisted rank structure has not changed with the Air Force's, which shouldn't surprise anyone.  We still have leather nametags on flight suits, plastic encased bright insignia on flight suits, ultramarine blue nametapes on BDU's, and propellers on our airplanes.

Not surprised except for the fact that the Cadet program was able to make the change, but yet the Senior Program was forgotten about.....

I am surprised we are getting riled up about rank here instead of the changes in the new logistics reg. 

[SarDragon]

How many E-4s are we talking about here? How long will someone be stuck as a SMWOG (NCO E-4)? Only until they promote to E-5. How long does that take these days? 18 months? 24 months? If someone cannot progress in the military from E-4 to E-5, the likelihood of their ability to progress as a CAP officer could be questionable.

After looking at the various requirements, it appears that the longest someone will have to wait, based on minimum TIG and the member joining the day they promote to E-4, is 12 months. Since all CAP NCO promotions are tied to their military rank anyway, why is this such a big deal? Someone becoming an NCO member should be given guidance on the promotion structure early on in their indoctrination, and be aware of the differences.

I don't see a big problem here. Can any of you present realistic figures on the number of members affected by this "problem"?

[Major Carrales]

CAP's enlisted rank structure has not changed with the Air Force's, which shouldn't surprise anyone.  We still have leather nametags on flight suits, plastic encased bright insignia on flight suits, ultramarine blue nametapes on BDU's, and propellers on our airplanes.

Not surprised except for the fact that the Cadet program was able to make the change, but yet the Senior Program was forgotten about.....

I am surprised we are getting riled up about rank here instead of the changes in the new logistics reg.

It might be because CAP structure as it has existed for these many years has no really place for NCOs. (now it should be pointed out that Three Years ago an very conscious effort was made and a CMSgt of the CAP even existed for a while, but that issue died with the controversies of that time) 

Now, before some of you blinded by some sense that makes you think that that was some insult...read beyond this phrase.

Currently, we produce the 6 month 2nd Lt.  Any person with a high school degree who concludes Level I is promoted to 2nd Lt, some are sort of breveted/appointed to some grade for mission related or prior duty grade.

This means that Enlisted grade is out of the norm.  That does not mean that NCOs do not being in needed skills.  I have always seen it a more of an hommage to years of service and a respect for the contributions of the Non-Commissioned Officer to the Armed Forces. 

Now, if one started as a Airman Basic upon joining and promoted up (with certain criteria for holding officers ranks and grade) this would be different.

This is one of those glaring differences between the culture of CAP and that of the USAF and its Reserve and Guard components that I am always harping about that shows why USAF concepts, policy and ideas cannot merely be grafted on CAP.

[CAPSGT]

I am surprised we are getting riled up about rank here instead of the changes in the new logistics reg.

Agreed.

Honestly, to me the new Logistics reg doesn't seem to be too much of a drastic change like the cover letter made it out to be.  To me it simply appears that they are moving more stuff online for better tracking and accountability like they have been with everything in CAP and are consolidating systems, documents, etc.  There are a few new things, but for the most part they really won't affect your average squadron member on a regular basis.

[arajca]

I've read through CAPR 174-1 draft twice. The biggest change at the unit level will be the requirement to validate everything online. Also, all issued equipment must be physically inspected annually as opposed to the member verifying they still have it.

A good point is the annual value recalculation. If you are issued a laptop, each year the value drops as the unit depreciates. So, if something happens to the laptop you are issued, you're not on the hook for the new cost, but rather the current value. I presume they're using industry standard schedules for this calculation.

Another good point is the process for annual inventory reporting - no more send reports to wing to send to CAP-USAF. Each unit will submit it through ORMS at the end of the fiscal year.

The new reg also requires the unit to have access to a scanner.

[jimmydeanno]

Are there any units that wouldn't have a scanner at this point?  I thought they were all provided with Copy/Printer/Fax machines in the last few years.  At our unit, we have three generations of multi-function machines issued by the wing...

I'm all for online validations, etc.  As long as it makes things easier for the units to do, I'm good with it.  Added bureaucracy isn't my dish.

[ZigZag911]

Regarding the E-4 issue: since the reg allows former/retired NCOs to receive equivalent grade in CAP, this needs to be addressed...these members are no longer active in the military (regular, reserve or guard), and won't receive further promotion to E-5.

If we want to say E-5 and above only, we can do that, but the reg should be made clear.

[RADIOMAN015]

I've read through CAPR 174-1 draft twice. The biggest change at the unit level will be the requirement to validate everything online. Also, all issued equipment must be physically inspected annually as opposed to the member verifying they still have it.

A good point is the annual value recalculation. If you are issued a laptop, each year the value drops as the unit depreciates. So, if something happens to the laptop you are issued, you're not on the hook for the new cost, but rather the current value. I presume they're using industry standard schedules for this calculation.

Another good point is the process for annual inventory reporting - no more send reports to wing to send to CAP-USAF. Each unit will submit it through ORMS at the end of the fiscal year.

The new reg also requires the unit to have access to a scanner.

Yes the computerization data base seems to be an excellent idea.  I would think that most units would at least want to download a copy of the inventory either for print out or at least to place on one computer and/or memory stick.  Not sure how many units have flatbed scanners.

It's interesting that the potential monetary assessment for "negligence", seems to be open ended.  Before there was a distinction between "simple" & "gross" negligence which limited the monetary assessment.  This regulation also fails to define "negligence".    Additionally the member that gets assessed for over $500.00, can extend repayment greater than 12 months.  Hopefully there would be some compassion in CAP for the retired/disabled members that owe under $500.00 and financially needs to extend the payment for greater than 12 months also

Regarding depreciation, if the straight line method (e.g. same $$ amount every year) is used for cameras, computers, radio equipment, vehicles, the members will actually be paying more for CAP's book value at time of loss, since other organization's normally use accelerated methods of depreciation for these asset classes (and this book value is less).  Also anyone being assessed should look at the market value of the asset external to cap.  As an example EF Johnson radios, as assets on CAP inventory records for approx $1.7K each; but the exact models currently sells in the high $500's to 600's range externally on commercial markets.

Further noted is that units can be assessed for losses damages as well as members.  So I would guess if a unit's member tells CAP "to stick it where the sun doesn't shine" on an assessment (just quits or makes partial payment on what he/she feels is adequate than stops), with the Wing Banker's program, CAP hq might just take the funds from the unit    (So this is probably another reason to have fund raising & a separate support organization rather than to have large $$ balances in squadron official bank accounts that could be plundered by higher headquarters  ).

There's very little protection in this regulation for CAP members or units.  It basically is making sure there's a consistent assessment strategy/policy followed and I'm willing to bet that more members/units are going to end up paying larger amounts than in the past in case of damage or loss.  BTW this entire process is primarily due to CAP's unwillingness to buy insurance that most other non profit organizations' buy (to protect themselves from asset losses as well as their voluntary members) , and to insist on the "self insurance" strategy, which really puts the dedicated volunteer individual members at risk in case of loss/damage to CAP equipment. 
RM                 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Regarding the E-4 issue: since the reg allows former/retired NCOs to receive equivalent grade in CAP, this needs to be addressed...these members are no longer active in the military (regular, reserve or guard), and won't receive further promotion to E-5.

If we want to say E-5 and above only, we can do that, but the reg should be made clear.

Better yet, put a two-track promotion schedule together for adult enlisted personnel — one for former military personnel who would like further promotion, and a track for those folks off the street without the ability to promote via direct appointment. Maybe the AEPSM curriculum as well as an adaptation of the cadet D&C curriculum could be involved, along with specialty tracks and ES training requirements?

[Major Carrales]

Regarding the E-4 issue: since the reg allows former/retired NCOs to receive equivalent grade in CAP, this needs to be addressed...these members are no longer active in the military (regular, reserve or guard), and won't receive further promotion to E-5.

If we want to say E-5 and above only, we can do that, but the reg should be made clear.

Better yet, put a two-track promotion schedule together for adult enlisted personnel — one for former military personnel who would like further promotion, and a track for those folks off the street without the ability to promote via direct appointment. Maybe the AEPSM curriculum as well as an adaptation of the cadet D&C curriculum could be involved, along with specialty tracks and ES training requirements?

Why do CAP Officers (Senior Members) need to do D&C?  I can see resistance to it.

[Spike]

RADIOMAN,

The REG does not afford many protections.  It is bringing CAP members more in line (responsibility wise) with Federal Employees.  I think this is coming from CAP-USAF, and not necessarily the Corporate side.

If I read correctly, if you fail to pay the damage amount you may loose CAP membership.  Did anyone else pick up on this??  Seriously if I torch a CAP Van, and they charge me $23,000 I will take the membership termination over paying!  They need to be more clear, that the Government can go after you and garnish wages or social security/ retirement benefits for damage costs.  However doing that would most likely scare off members we already have, not to mention a few prospective ones. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Regarding the E-4 issue: since the reg allows former/retired NCOs to receive equivalent grade in CAP, this needs to be addressed...these members are no longer active in the military (regular, reserve or guard), and won't receive further promotion to E-5.

If we want to say E-5 and above only, we can do that, but the reg should be made clear.

Better yet, put a two-track promotion schedule together for adult enlisted personnel — one for former military personnel who would like further promotion, and a track for those folks off the street without the ability to promote via direct appointment. Maybe the AEPSM curriculum as well as an adaptation of the cadet D&C curriculum could be involved, along with specialty tracks and ES training requirements?

Why do CAP Officers (Senior Members) need to do D&C?  I can see resistance to it.

Because, frankly, many of our officers senior adult regular members should learn to lead by example. We wear the Air Force uniform; it is incumbent upon those who wear it to have some modicum of military bearing and understanding of military customs and courtesies.

This is not a negotiable point. Our nation's uniform comes with traditions and responsibilities. And as long as CAP members are afforded the privilege of wearing the nation's uniform, we must hold up our end.

Besides that, many of our senior members are privately ridiculed by cadets for being absolutely, totally clueless and unworthy of the grade they wear because they don't even know how to salute, let alone do a little close-order drill. Speaking as a former cadet, I can vouch for that. It also is why many Air Force personnel think we're a joke, wearing their uniform and making a mockery of it, insulting the warrior's tradition by being so casual and cavalier.

When you wear officer grade, you're supposed to be held to a higher standard. Don't want the responsibilities and want to show the respect that comes with the uniform, there's always the Golf Course Uniform and other non-military combinations.

Wow, man, sorry to unload on you. Sorry if you had to put the flak jacket on all the way across the gulf. But I hope you appreciate my sentiment.

[Major Carrales]

Regarding the E-4 issue: since the reg allows former/retired NCOs to receive equivalent grade in CAP, this needs to be addressed...these members are no longer active in the military (regular, reserve or guard), and won't receive further promotion to E-5.

If we want to say E-5 and above only, we can do that, but the reg should be made clear.

Better yet, put a two-track promotion schedule together for adult enlisted personnel — one for former military personnel who would like further promotion, and a track for those folks off the street without the ability to promote via direct appointment. Maybe the AEPSM curriculum as well as an adaptation of the cadet D&C curriculum could be involved, along with specialty tracks and ES training requirements?

Why do CAP Officers (Senior Members) need to do D&C?  I can see resistance to it.

Because, frankly, many of our officers senior adult regular members should learn to lead by example. We wear the Air Force uniform; it is incumbent upon those who wear it to have some modicum of military bearing and understanding of military customs and courtesies.

This is not a negotiable point. Our nation's uniform comes with traditions and responsibilities. And as long as CAP members are afforded the privilege of wearing the nation's uniform, we must hold up our end.

Besides that, many of our senior members are privately ridiculed by cadets for being absolutely, totally clueless and unworthy of the grade they wear because they don't even know how to salute, let alone do a little close-order drill. Speaking as a former cadet, I can vouch for that. It also is why many Air Force personnel think we're a joke, wearing their uniform and making a mockery of it, insulting the warrior's tradition by being so casual and cavalier.

When you wear officer grade, you're supposed to be held to a higher standard. Don't want the responsibilities and want to show the respect that comes with the uniform, there's always the Golf Course Uniform and other non-military combinations.

Wow, man, sorry to unload on you. Sorry if you had to put the flak jacket on all the way across the gulf. But I hope you appreciate my sentiment.

NO need to worry.  I'm with ya.  I'm just gonna address this matter in my weekly newsletter and was curious how others would react.

[SarDragon]

Why do CAP Officers (Senior Members) need to do D&C?  I can see resistance to it.

We should know enough D&C to do the following:

Perform a proper salute
Stand at attention
Stand at both rest positions
Perform facing movements correctly
March to the extent needed to accept an award in a proper manner.

If middle school kids can learn to do these, I see no reason why adults can't also.

[Spike]

Besides that, many of our senior members are privately ridiculed by cadets for being absolutely, totally clueless and unworthy of the grade they wear because they don't even know how to salute, let alone do a little close-order drill. Speaking as a former cadet, I can vouch for that. It also is why many Air Force personnel think we're a joke, wearing their uniform and making a mockery of it, insulting the warrior's tradition by being so casual and cavalier.

Two things.  I was at a Wing Conference where a Cadet Called me out on being part of the "Fakey Officer Club", I let it go and kept on walking.  Two weeks later I go to my Reserve Drill and am introduced to a young man who is just on his way to Basic, and it was that same Cadet who had made the rude comments to me.  The shock and look of terror on his face when he saw the Captains bars on my green's was awesome.  He had just realized he made a huge mistake and I was his Commander.

About 5 years ago I was attending a SAREX and had a unique conversation with a CAP-RAP member.  She said she did not accept why CAP members wear Officer rank, and she would never call them Sir or Ma'am.  I did not expect this from an Air Force Member.  A few months later we run into each other at the Commissary me in ACU's, she in BDU's, and she tried to avoid me until I asked her if she would like to step in front of me in line since she only had three items.  Embarrassed she accepted, most likely just to get away from making any more conversation.     

Moral of the story, you never know what person is wearing the CAP uniform.  I have met Senators in CAP uniform, as well as Mayors and AD Colonels.  We need to respect each other in CAP.  We all volunteer for separate personal reasons, but in the end we ALL volunteered. 

I am sick of hearing how CAP rank means nothing, how we pretend to be Air Force or that we should not be in an Air Force uniform.  CAP Rank is a reward for selfless service, we followed Air Force traditions before there was even an Air Force and we wear our Countries uniform at a time when less and less Americans are supportive of the Military.

Those naysayers need to keep their opinions to themselves, when your only desire is to diminish the sacrifices and achievements of CAP members everywhere.  Just because you don't agree with how CAP is does not mean you should convince others of that.  You are free to resign yourselves at any time. 

This is NOT directed at Buckeye.  I only quoted his words for reference on what seems to be a growing sector within CAP.   

[Major Carrales]

Well said, Spike. How we carry ourselves in CAP uniform reinforces the meaning of that rank.  Let is be know that our value and worth is defined by how we act, to belittle these types of things in CAP is a self-fulfilling type of situation.

Let us take pride in our traditions and make the meanings clear by example. 

[heliodoc]

With all the changes with CAP to align with the Guv

It should have been done a long time ago

AND

With all the responsibilities going on , it MIGHT have to do with the DHS HLS anyway.  Do this or else is the underlying theme

For us with RM experience...this is a no brainer....

For those just thinking CAP....... More responsibility will lie on the individual .

Too bad we're still a "Corporation."  Maybe the "Corporate" attitude will slowly ebb away

As for the uniform stuff.......WOW even this thread is about....wait one...    UNIFORMS...AGAIN!!!! 

How about that CAP Sr Member D&C stuff??   how about limiting it 15 minutes a week nite....there is sooooooomuch more to running a Squadron. 

I too am sick and tired of alot of things in CAP..... perpetuated by many individuals PRETENDING to be officers and leaders.  Leadership in CAP leaves ALOT to be desired as I have been witnessing lately.  Leading by example, seems to be the toughest one for MANY Wings

[DrJbdm]

 I strongly believe that CAP needs much higher standards to become a CAP officer. 6 months and have a pulse is not high enough! I would say that at an absolute minimum keep the current ECI 13 and make it a requirement before you become eligible to become a 2nd Lt.

[Cecil DP]

I strongly believe that CAP needs much higher standards to become a CAP officer. 6 months and have a pulse is not high enough! I would say that at an absolute minimum keep the current ECI 13 and make it a requirement before you become eligible to become a 2nd Lt.

According to 50-17 attaining the Certificate of Profeciency (Davis Award) is when you are considered a "functioning Officer". So why not use that as the gateway for commissioning?

[JohnKachenmeister]

I agree with everything that Spike said.

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc.  We even have cadet officers and NCO's help teach them.  It is fun to watch a group of 50-somethings in formation while a teenager says:  "I am Chief Master Sergeant Umpdefrat, and I will be your instructor.  At this time we will learn the right and left facing maneuvers."

I know a weekend isn't much, but it is more than most do.  We have been doing it for a year, and the retention of our OTS officers is much greater than the untrained officers.  So is their duty performance, according to their squadron commanders.

I think is is nothing more than the feeling that they have earned their rank.  They wear it more proudly.

[Short Field]

I strongly believe that CAP needs much higher standards to become a CAP officer. 6 months and have a pulse is not high enough!

  :clap:   I totally agree.  And since so many want us to be more AF and follow the AF standards, make the requirements to be a CAP officer the same as to be a USAF officer.  Then there will be plenty of need (and bodies) to fill out the CAP enlisted ranks so many people want to see.    However, you would have to do something about the pesky "up or out" policies on promotion. 

[Capt Rivera]

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc.

We have been doing it for a year, and the retention of our OTS officers is much greater than the untrained officers.  So is their duty performance, according to their squadron commanders.

I think is is nothing more than the feeling that they have earned their rank.  They wear it more proudly.

Is there anything online about this? Is it a squadron/group/wing course? Any numbers on this?

[RADIOMAN015]

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc..

Again why are you adding more hoops that adult volunteers have to jump through that isn't required
Level 1 training at:  http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cap_university/professional_development/afiadl__cap_student_page/level_one.cfm
Module 4, provides appropriate training for senior members on what CAP considers to be the requirements of a CAP senior member -- it does not include marching/drill!

I would think about 1 hour or less of time would be required to help one master these movements   One entire weekend of this, is not what the intention was of re doing the level 1 training for adult members (to save their valuable time to do more important things).   Other advance course such as SLS, & CLC provide what is needed for CAP officers to advance.

Other than basic enlisted/officer training in the AF, and some other PME courses, NO one (unless you are on a ceremonial team) in the AF at the base level  is doing any marching/drilling on a regular basis.  They are too busy doing real mission work that needs to be done (rather than marching around in circles,which seems to me we even have our cadets doing way too much of as it is now).  Most change of command ceremonies have military members standing in place at attention, parade rest, & at ease rather than marching/passing in review, primarily because all the squadrons would have to practice this ahead of time, and mission requirements are more important than "marching in circles"!

Apparently some of you in CAP just haven't figure out yet that the majority of CAP senior members have little or no interest in marching, drill & ceremonies -- that the way it is folks :angel:   

RM

[Short Field]

^^^ Personally, I think a lot of this comes from the non-military service members and members who were in one of the USAF's sister services.  We are NOT the Army or Marine aux.  In 28 years of service, I only marched while in a training status (BMT, AFROTC, Tech School).  I was in lots of formations, but we always got lined up, spaced out, put into "Attention", "Dress Right", then back to "Parade Rest" and "Rest".  Then finally "Dismissed".  No marching into position.

[heliodoc]

^^^

Yep agree with Short Field

In my  22 yrs Army and ARNG Aviation formation was a bigger deal then off to assigned MX tasks

One will learn in CAP, that it is not all D&C that makes us look sharp All the time.....it's how we treat the customer who we are supporting.  They may see us once-n-while in our 1550's combo s and BDU's stormin around looking sharp.  But we really have other tasks at hand to get done in CAP

[ßτε]

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc.  We even have cadet officers and NCO's help teach them.  It is fun to watch a group of 50-somethings in formation while a teenager says:  "I am Chief Master Sergeant Umpdefrat, and I will be your instructor.  At this time we will learn the right and left facing maneuvers."

How do you reconcile this with CAPR 35-5 paragraph 1-1?

1-1. General. Criteria for promotion of CAP senior members will be applied uniformly throughout Civil Air Patrol. CAP unit supplements to this regulation in the form of publications or oral instructions that change the basic policies, criteria, procedures, and practices prescribed herein are prohibited.

[Short Field]

Pesky CAP regulations...

[RiverAux]

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc.  We even have cadet officers and NCO's help teach them.  It is fun to watch a group of 50-somethings in formation while a teenager says:  "I am Chief Master Sergeant Umpdefrat, and I will be your instructor.  At this time we will learn the right and left facing maneuvers."

How do you reconcile this with CAPR 35-5 paragraph 1-1?

1-1. General. Criteria for promotion of CAP senior members will be applied uniformly throughout Civil Air Patrol. CAP unit supplements to this regulation in the form of publications or oral instructions that change the basic policies, criteria, procedures, and practices prescribed herein are prohibited.

There is some wiggleroom in the fact that most of the promotion routes require that the person be performing in an "exemplary manner".   Understanding the basics of D&C is actually above the norm for most senior members. 

[BuckeyeDEJ]

What's so bad about senior adult regular members learning the basics of D&C? If you're going to play Air Force, either do it right or... well... wear the golf shirt!

[Short Field]

I never played Air Force - I was Air Force.  I wear the golf shirt 90% of the time, one of the two flight suits (blue or green) 9% of the time, and the white shirt with grey pants 1% of the time.   I only wear my USAF uniforms to USAF or AFA functions.

It is all a matter of comfort and no need to impress anyone.   

[Pylon]

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc.  We even have cadet officers and NCO's help teach them.  It is fun to watch a group of 50-somethings in formation while a teenager says:  "I am Chief Master Sergeant Umpdefrat, and I will be your instructor.  At this time we will learn the right and left facing maneuvers."

How do you reconcile this with CAPR 35-5 paragraph 1-1?

1-1. General. Criteria for promotion of CAP senior members will be applied uniformly throughout Civil Air Patrol. CAP unit supplements to this regulation in the form of publications or oral instructions that change the basic policies, criteria, procedures, and practices prescribed herein are prohibited.

If the Group offers covering their Level I modules only on those training weekends, and they choose to cover more stuff than just the basic summary conversations, I don't see how it conflicts. 

If Squadron Commander Captain John Doe sits down with new SM Jack Smith for his Level I summary conversations and Capt Doe decides to go into more depth and cover more material with SM Smith, is that also a violation of the reg? 

Frankly, a weekend Officer Basic Course/Level I Workshop would be welcomed by me.  Any long-term volunteer at my non-profit employer needs to go through several days of orientation training, so I don't see this as uncommon or unwarranted.   I could easily think of 2-days worth of training and knowledge applicable to new members that could fill a weekend workshop.

[Hawk200]

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc.  We even have cadet officers and NCO's help teach them.  It is fun to watch a group of 50-somethings in formation while a teenager says:  "I am Chief Master Sergeant Umpdefrat, and I will be your instructor.  At this time we will learn the right and left facing maneuvers."

How do you reconcile this with CAPR 35-5 paragraph 1-1?

1-1. General. Criteria for promotion of CAP senior members will be applied uniformly throughout Civil Air Patrol. CAP unit supplements to this regulation in the form of publications or oral instructions that change the basic policies, criteria, procedures, and practices prescribed herein are prohibited.

If the Group offers covering their Level I modules only on those training weekends, and they choose to cover more stuff than just the basic summary conversations, I don't see how it conflicts. 

If Squadron Commander Captain John Doe sits down with new SM Jack Smith for his Level I summary conversations and Capt Doe decides to go into more depth and cover more material with SM Smith, is that also a violation of the reg? 

Frankly, a weekend Officer Basic Course/Level I Workshop would be welcomed by me.  Any long-term volunteer at my non-profit employer needs to go through several days of orientation training, so I don't see this as uncommon or unwarranted.   I could easily think of 2-days worth of training and knowledge applicable to new members that could fill a weekend workshop.

I'll second that one. I think more than a few new members would like to have some more in depth training. The problem is that a lot of our present and longer time members lack the pride in Civil Air Patrol that existed decades ago. There's a lot of pushing only the bare minimum, and even that seems to be like pulling teeth.

Then again, maybe flight clubbers really shouldn't have to worry about things like uniforms, salutes or regs. That's not what they're here for. Kinda sad. Some of the cheapest flying out there, and they can't even be bothered to work for it.

[Ricochet13]

Don't be surprised if in the future at some point there is a division between those members appointed to officer ranks and others which will be appointed to NCO ranks.  The new OEM specialty track may be the basis for determining who is and who isn't wearing officer rank on uniforms. 

[Short Field]

Additional training on a volunteer basis is fine and I don't think anyone has objected to that.  However, creating additional training requirements at the local level in order to be promoted is against CAP regulations.   So the main thing you are teaching all the newbies is that CAP regulations can be ignored with impunity. 

[Eclipse]

Don't be surprised if in the future at some point there is a division between those members appointed to officer ranks and others which will be appointed to NCO ranks.

I'm going to be very surprised if that ever happens as there is no NCO system in CAP, and there never will be...

Now, let's all go and grind some beans, open a cold one (of your choice), or just sit back and see who isn't capable of restraining themselves from starting that argument in this thread instead of leaving it to the search function.

boop...beep...boop...beep....boop...beep...

[Gunner C]

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc..

Apparently some of you in CAP just haven't figure out yet that the majority of CAP senior members have little or no interest in marching, drill & ceremonies -- that the way it is folks :angel:   

And it's served us so well.  Heck, you can go to any CAP squadron and just be OVERCOME by the professionalism. It's intuitively obvious to the casual observer. 

[Eclipse]

I only wear my USAF uniforms to USAF or AFA functions.

What else would you wear there?

I wear my blue CAP uniform to CAP activities.  There's a difference.

[Short Field]

^^^ Appropriate civilian attire.

[Eclipse]

^^^ Appropriate civilian attire.

I think you missed or ignored my point...

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I never played Air Force - I was Air Force.  I wear the golf shirt 90% of the time, one of the two flight suits (blue or green) 9% of the time, and the white shirt with grey pants 1% of the time.   I only wear my USAF uniforms to USAF or AFA functions.

It is all a matter of comfort and no need to impress anyone.   

Fair enough, but what ever happened to leadership by example? Especially for officers and airmen who work with cadets, D&C and customs and courtesies training is imperative.

If you were Air Force, you weren't playing. CAP, many times, on the other hand....

[Short Field]

^^^ Appropriate civilian attire.

I think you missed or ignored my point...

I wear the appropriate CAP uniform or authorized civilian attire to CAP functions.  I just don't buy into the "if you don't wear the USAF Style uniforms, you are not professional" view of too many CAPers.  There have been posts on here that if the member could not wear a USAF Style uniform, they would just quit CAP.  That compliments the view of others that if you don't meet the standards to wear a USAF Style uniform, you shouldn't be in CAP.  I find that an amazing attitude in a "professional" person.   I am in CAP to accomplish the mission in a professional manner and IAW CAP regulations - not look cool so I can impress my neighbors.  Leadership is not conveyed by the uniform option you wear but by the leadership skills you display and use.  I don't worry about my leadership skills - I had over 1200 USAF, USA, USN, USMC, and USCG personnel assigned under me when I retired. 

[RiverAux]

I'm always amused by the fact that we've got people that think you're a poser or out to impress your neighbors if you wear the AF style uniform while at the same time making a point of the fact that they choose only to wear the civilian style uniforms.  Basically, since they think anyone wearing the AF-style is a poser they don't want to wear it because they think everyone will think they are a poser. 

And at the same time we do have those who think you're not really a proud or contributing member of CAP unless you wear the AF-style uniform even though other options are available and are just as valid a choice under our current regulations. 

I personally am in favor of at a minimum dropping the civilian options and only having military style uniforms (both AF and corp), though I would prefer AF only.  But this isn't because I have made some value judgment about those who wear the uniforms I don't like.   It is because I think it is better for the organization as a whole to have a more a"uniform" and more "military" appearance. 

[Short Field]

Not all - but some.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I'm always amused by the fact that we've got people that think you're a poser or out to impress your neighbors if you wear the AF style uniform while at the same time making a point of the fact that they choose only to wear the civilian style uniforms.  Basically, since they think anyone wearing the AF-style is a poser they don't want to wear it because they think everyone will think they are a poser. 

And at the same time we do have those who think you're not really a proud or contributing member of CAP unless you wear the AF-style uniform even though other options are available and are just as valid a choice under our current regulations. 

I personally am in favor of at a minimum dropping the civilian options and only having military style uniforms (both AF and corp), though I would prefer AF only.  But this isn't because I have made some value judgment about those who wear the uniforms I don't like.   It is because I think it is better for the organization as a whole to have a more a"uniform" and more "military" appearance.

It would also help promote a cohesiveness and "team" mindset, and help us harmonize with our parent service, to ditch the cacophony of uniforms CAP is beleagured with and go with the Air Force uniforms and one non-Air Force option.

There wouldn't be the varying strata of members, delineated by uniforms. Instead, our uniforms would identify us with our duties, not so much our personal tastes or physical status.

[Spike]

Wow.  We clearly see where our priorities lie as CAP members.  Lets not talk about the changes to policy regarding our jobs or squadrons, but lets talk about uniform issues that have nothing to do with 99% of us.

[RiverAux]

Uh, uniform issues affect 100% of us. 

[heliodoc]

Uh, while uniform issues affect 100% of us, it sure has paralyzed CAP (apparently in this forum) that nothing can be solved or brought UNLESS it turns into a uniform thread...

What to wear, how to wear it, how to D&C, where to D&C, what kind of Mess uni do I wear, Can I wear my Mess uni to fill my gas tank.... on and on

I can see where folks get these ideas.  I wish CAP could visit CERT, Citizen Corps, Red Cross, etc and see how much chirping about uniforms can get going.

I still believe, as some here, there is MORE important work in CAP than impressing your friends and well starched your BDU's ared

[Hawk200]

Back to the original topic then. I don't see too many changes to the 35-5, other than including the content of ICLs or NB decisions. It's a needed update.

As to property management, I wasn't really very familiar with that, since I haven't held a position in the last few years that would require me to sign for anything. I pretty much don't know the differences of this new draft as opposed to ones in the past.

Although it's not intended to bring it back to a uniform discussion, I have to wonder why the information on the Logistics badge is included in 174-1. That info is not relevant to the nature of the pub, and shouldn't have even been mentioned. There is no reason to mention a badge in anything other than 39-1, or the specialty track pamphlet.

[arajca]

Although it's not intended to bring it back to a uniform discussion, I have to wonder why the information on the Logistics badge is included in 174-1. That info is not relevant to the nature of the pub, and shouldn't have even been mentioned. There is no reason to mention a badge in anything other than 39-1, or the specialty track pamphlet.

The new reg replaces CAPR 67-1, which does cover the award of the Logistics badge. FYI, although the new reg replaces CAPR 100-2, award of the Comm badge is not covered there and therefore is not covered in the new reg.

As to property management, I wasn't really very familiar with that, since I haven't held a position in the last few years that would require me to sign for anything. I pretty much don't know the differences of this new draft as opposed to ones in the past.

Probably the biggest change that would affect more than the Log/Comm folks is the mandatory online validation system. The CAPF 37 is changing to a Temporary Receipt of Issue to be used only for 7 days, during which time the signer MUST login and validate the issue. Failure to do so means the equipment is recovered at the end of the 7 day period.

Even the expendable issues are moving to online instead of locally maintained paper.

[Short Field]

There is a wide range of expertise when it comes to writing new regulations.  This spills over into other areas (like the replacement for ECI 13).  It was recommended somewhere that a more open forum be used to vet new regulations.  That would be a great idea!.

[Eclipse]

Even the expendable issues are moving to online instead of locally maintained paper.

Its about time.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Here in Gp 4, we require our new officers to attend a weekend OTS.  They learn drill to the same standards as Curry-level cadets... basic drill, facings, salutes, reporting to an officer, etc..

Again why are you adding more hoops that adult volunteers have to jump through that isn't required
Level 1 training at:  http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cap_university/professional_development/afiadl__cap_student_page/level_one.cfm
Module 4, provides appropriate training for senior members on what CAP considers to be the requirements of a CAP senior member -- it does not include marching/drill!

I would think about 1 hour or less of time would be required to help one master these movements   One entire weekend of this, is not what the intention was of re doing the level 1 training for adult members (to save their valuable time to do more important things).   Other advance course such as SLS, & CLC provide what is needed for CAP officers to advance.

Other than basic enlisted/officer training in the AF, and some other PME courses, NO one (unless you are on a ceremonial team) in the AF at the base level  is doing any marching/drilling on a regular basis.  They are too busy doing real mission work that needs to be done (rather than marching around in circles,which seems to me we even have our cadets doing way too much of as it is now).  Most change of command ceremonies have military members standing in place at attention, parade rest, & at ease rather than marching/passing in review, primarily because all the squadrons would have to practice this ahead of time, and mission requirements are more important than "marching in circles"!

Apparently some of you in CAP just haven't figure out yet that the majority of CAP senior members have little or no interest in marching, drill & ceremonies -- that the way it is folks :angel:   

RM

Yes.  We have raised the standard to wear CAP officer rank.

(Pause for shocked gasps)

Yes, we have required that those who wear the uniform of the USAF absorb a small amount of military skills in exchange for the honor of wearing officer rank.

Yes, we have created a situation where the officer must march, just like the cadets.  Maybe they will have some sympathy for those young folks at attention in the hot sun, now that they have walked a mile in their low-quarter oxfords.

No, it is not "Online" it is a face-to-face class in drill to the standards of the Curry award.  It also includes classes in military customs and courtesy, CAP history, our missions, wear of the uniform, and other stuff.

We call it the Auxiliary Officer Training School.  It works. 

Sorry, Radioman, if you don't like it.  Excellence has to start somewhere.

[RiverAux]

I'm with you in spirit here Kach, but I'm not sure I'm with you in implementation.  I think if you were to deny a request for promotion based solely on lack of attendance at this school, it could be successfully appealed.  Perhaps you've got the leadership skills to convince everyone to do it even though you can't really force them to, in which case such an appeal may never be made. 

I'd like to see something like that for new CAP seniors and fully support you in strongly encouraging people to attend such a class, but under the current regs I think it would even fall outside the "wiggleroom" I mentioned earlier regarding exemplary performance.

People forget that back when CAP was formed, the curriculum for new members was something like 180 hours of training.  Volunteers can meet a high standard. 

[Gunner C]

People forget that back when CAP was formed, the curriculum for new members was something like 180 hours of training.  Volunteers can meet a high standard.

Only if the standard is required.  Raise the bar, they'll meet it most of the time.  Lower the bar, and they'll meet it every time.

[PHall]

^^^ Appropriate civilian attire.

I think you missed or ignored my point...

The point you missed is that he is retired from the Air Force.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I'm with you in spirit here Kach, but I'm not sure I'm with you in implementation.  I think if you were to deny a request for promotion based solely on lack of attendance at this school, it could be successfully appealed.  Perhaps you've got the leadership skills to convince everyone to do it even though you can't really force them to, in which case such an appeal may never be made. 

I'd like to see something like that for new CAP seniors and fully support you in strongly encouraging people to attend such a class, but under the current regs I think it would even fall outside the "wiggleroom" I mentioned earlier regarding exemplary performance.

People forget that back when CAP was formed, the curriculum for new members was something like 180 hours of training.  Volunteers can meet a high standard.

We have had some folks not want to attend the training.  We have not pushed it as a mandatory-for-promotion item yet, although under the provision that the commander has the authority to evaluate duty perfomance and withhold promotion if duty performance is not up to par, we feel that we have adequate authority to do so.

At this point, it is simply strongly enouraged by the leadership staff and commanders.\

But, even without requiring the training, the improved performance and reliability of graduates is apparent.  Some CAP members desire to wallow in mediocrity.  It is good to identify them early so you know not to depend upon them.

[A.Member]

Does anyone else think they should just eliminate the Flight Officer ranks?  When you look at it, they really serve no purpose.

[Cecil DP]

Does anyone else think they should just eliminate the Flight Officer ranks?  When you look at it, they really serve no purpose.

The Flight Officer grades give our under 21 year old Senior Members the opportunity to exercise authority and responsibility in the jobs they are given and  to show that they are progressing within the PD programs. If CAP eliminates the FO grades, they might as well eliminate Senior Membership for those persons under the age of 21 or allow the commission of members under the age limit, which is done by the services (rarely, but it is done).   

[A.Member]

Does anyone else think they should just eliminate the Flight Officer ranks?  When you look at it, they really serve no purpose.

The Flight Officer grades give our under 21 year old Senior Members the opportunity to exercise authority and responsibility in the jobs they are given and  to show that they are progressing within the PD programs. If CAP eliminates the FO grades, they might as well eliminate Senior Membership for those persons under the age of 21 or allow the commission of members under the age limit, which is done by the services (rarely, but it is done).

I understand why they were created but in practicality they're rather pointless. 

If a cadet joins under the age of 18 and they intend to stay in CAP, they will almost without exception remain in cadet status until 21 (at least that's been my experience).   If you're over 18 when you join you're a senior member.  Pretty simple.  I just don't see particular value in the retaining the FO ranks.

[flyguy06]

Instead of using ambiguous terms like NCO - why don't we just say what we mean...if you are an E-5 or above, you can wear your stripes in CAP.  Seriously, do we try to make stuff difficult on purpose?

I seriously think many people in CAP do. They nit pick about about "well, this service says an E4 is an NCO and this service says this" I believe in keeping it simple. The point is if you are an NCO in the military and you want to be an NCO in CAP then CAP should accomidate. Thats the bottom line of what you folks are saying. Stop trying to nit pick every little detail.

[Hawk200]

I seriously think many people in CAP do. They nit pick about about "well, this service says an E4 is an NCO and this service says this" I believe in keeping it simple. The point is if you are an NCO in the military and you want to be an NCO in CAP then CAP should accomidate. Thats the bottom line of what you folks are saying. Stop trying to nit pick every little detail.

But we can't accomodate E-4 NCOs. The Air Force doesn't have any rank insignia for such a thing. For them, an E-4 NCO doesn't exist. There's really no way to create an insignia that would recognize it.

It may be lengthy, but we should clarify that the grade must equivalent to an Air Force NCO. I know people in the Air Force now are getting into the NCO grades a lot faster than when I was in (the Air Force). If they want to be CAP NCO's, they wouldn't have to wait too long.

[SarDragon]

The Flight Officer grades give our under 21 year old Senior Members the opportunity to exercise authority and responsibility in the jobs they are given and  to show that they are progressing within the PD programs. If CAP eliminates the FO grades, they might as well eliminate Senior Membership for those persons under the age of 21 or allow the commission of members under the age limit, which is done by the services (rarely, but it is done).

Is the highlighted portion not clear?

[ZigZag911]

Why not allow E-4 from other services who wish to remain 'enlisted' to serve as & wear Senior Airman?

[SarDragon]

I seriously think many people in CAP do. They nit pick about about "well, this service says an E4 is an NCO and this service says this" I believe in keeping it simple. The point is if you are an NCO in the military and you want to be an NCO in CAP then CAP should accomidate. Thats the bottom line of what you folks are saying. Stop trying to nit pick every little detail.

But we can't accomodate E-4 NCOs. The Air Force doesn't have any rank insignia for such a thing. For them, an E-4 NCO doesn't exist. There's really no way to create an insignia that would recognize it.

Put E-4 insignia on them, and call them Sergeant, just like the reg says (or used to say).

It may be lengthy, but we should clarify that the grade must equivalent to an Air Force NCO. I know people in the Air Force now are getting into the NCO grades a lot faster than when I was in (the Air Force). If they want to be CAP NCO's, they wouldn't have to wait too long.

That's probably the best compromise.

[Cecil DP]

Since at the present time National doesn't track NCO's and definetly doesn't require a copy of a DD-214, promotion orders, or an ID. Make them E-5's.

[SarDragon]

[Sgt Schultz]

I see noth-thing.

[/Sgt Schultz]

[badger bob]

A good point is the annual value recalculation. If you are issued a laptop, each year the value drops as the unit depreciates. So, if something happens to the laptop you are issued, you're not on the hook for the new cost, but rather the current value. I presume they're using industry standard schedules for this calculation.


The new reg also requires the unit to have access to a scanner.

The military doesn't depreciate assets. The change will be to a life-cycle cost using industry standard life cycles, ie. a laptop would have a 5-year lifecycle. The revaluation will be a straight line over the life cycle of the object. Several operational advantages. Currently, all assets are carried at original cost- so that WIN 95 desktop is still carried at $3,000 even if obsolete. Using a life cycle concept also allows for a long term budget planning for replacement of assets. Assets past the end of the life cycle can be authorized for a local disposal in some cases rather than requiring a return to the DRMO.

Furnishing each CAP unit a printer-scanner was a part of previous computer buys, but at the local level, scanning would only be required for local purchases- generally exceeding $500 and for donations. At the wing level scanning will be required for initial reciepts, donations, purchases, repair records, and any other helpful documentation.

[A.Member]

The Flight Officer grades give our under 21 year old Senior Members the opportunity to exercise authority and responsibility in the jobs they are given and  to show that they are progressing within the PD programs. If CAP eliminates the FO grades, they might as well eliminate Senior Membership for those persons under the age of 21 or allow the commission of members under the age limit, which is done by the services (rarely, but it is done).

Is the highlighted portion not clear?

Again, it has nothing to do with being clear.  The reason behind the creation of the rank is well understood. 

The question is whether it provides any true value.  Per my previous statement, I'd argue that it does not.   

[Eclipse]

Since at the present time National doesn't track NCO's and definetly doesn't require a copy of a DD-214, promotion orders, or an ID. Make them E-5's.

eServices does track NCO grades and of course you need the 214, current CAC, or similar to allow someone to wear their grade from another service.

[Spike]

QUESTION....on NCO's, where does the NCO appointment form 2 go?  I have always just kept it in the personnel file along with supporting documentation, but was told last week it needs to go to NHQ through the Wing Commander??

Have I been doing it wrong, and if so, is correction possible, with "backdating"??

[ßτε]

QUESTION....on NCO's, where does the NCO appointment form 2 go?  I have always just kept it in the personnel file along with supporting documentation, but was told last week it needs to go to NHQ through the Wing Commander??

Have I been doing it wrong, and if so, is correction possible, with "backdating"??

The CAPF 2 should be forwarded by the unit to NHQ, by email w/attachment, by fax, or by U.S. Postal Service. Since the unit commander is the approval authority, it shouldn't need to go through wing, but you may send a copy for their records.

There would be no real need to backdate. The promotion is effective upon unit commander's approval and TIG is irrelevant.

[PHall]

Since at the present time National doesn't track NCO's and definetly doesn't require a copy of a DD-214, promotion orders, or an ID. Make them E-5's.

Actually they do require a DD-214, orders or an ID card. You just have to show them to the Unit Commander who is signing the Form 2.