Bordertowns and Joint Agreements of Cooperation

[Holding Pattern]

CAPR 60-3 indicates:

1-18 f:

In order to maximize CAP's capabilities, wing and region commanders should establish "Joint Agreements of Cooperation" between their wings and bordering regions. Formalized agreements of cooperation and assistance will reduce duplication of effort, enabling missions to be performed promptly and efficiently. These agreements do not change the responsibilities of the NOC and coordinating agencies to approve sorties and resource usage on missions, and does not automatically authorize the use of pre-arranged assets. However, it can significantly decrease the time required to arrange for support and should be considered.

Does anyone have an example of this Joint Agreement of Cooperation that I could take a look at? I'm a squadron commander within 25 miles of a state line and since 2013 all of our operational missions have been in our neighboring state which also happens to reside in another region.

[PHall]

Have you checked with your Wing and Region to see if they have one already?

[Holding Pattern]

Have you checked with your Wing and Region to see if they have one already?

Yes. None of my wing's regulations are current (edit:except for 2), none of the MOUs have been reviewed in recent memory, and the last agreement written was before 1998 and has been lost to time.

I only know of that one because I was a cadet who paid attention to such silly things. I'll keep digging through archives, but as the magic 8-ball would say: "Outlook not good"

Thus I'm looking for a template.

[PHall]

Have you actually contacted your Wing about this? Computer search is one thing, but, IIRC these are things they look for on the Compliance Inspections.

[Holding Pattern]

Have you actually contacted your Wing about this? Computer search is one thing, but, IIRC these are things they look for on the Compliance Inspections.

I have discussed this with my chain of command. For reasons not germane to this specific line item, that chain is pre-occupied with other matters at the moment. Before I reach out direct to NHQ I figured I'd use captalk to see if there was an example handy.

[Fester]

Have you actually contacted your Wing about this? Computer search is one thing, but, IIRC these are things they look for on the Compliance Inspections.

I have discussed this with my chain of command. For reasons not germane to this specific line item, that chain is pre-occupied with other matters at the moment. Before I reach out direct to NHQ I figured I'd use captalk to see if there was an example handy.

I don't understand why this is a concern of yours.  Nowhere in that regulation does it say that Squadron Commanders have anything to do with these JAC's....

[Flying Pig]

Have you actually contacted your Wing about this? Computer search is one thing, but, IIRC these are things they look for on the Compliance Inspections.

I have discussed this with my chain of command. For reasons not germane to this specific line item, that chain is pre-occupied with other matters at the moment. Before I reach out direct to NHQ I figured I'd use captalk to see if there was an example handy.

I don't understand why this is a concern of yours.  Nowhere in that regulation does it say that Squadron Commanders have anything to do with these JAC's....

Probably because he identified a need.  Like most volunteer organizations, CAP operates on people taking the initiative when it comes to identifying and correcting issues.   The Sq Commander may not have anything to do with setting up agreements, but a Sq Commander can definitely identify a need, research it and take the problem AND the solution to the people who make it happen at the same time.  Imagine that.  A member identifies a need... AND identifies the solution?  Lets face it, that Group, Wing and Region Commander is absolutely no different than a 1st Lt Sq commander.  They have families, jobs and responsibilities outside of CAP as well.   Dont even remotely expect them to be able to ID and have the solutions to everything.

[Holding Pattern]

Have you actually contacted your Wing about this? Computer search is one thing, but, IIRC these are things they look for on the Compliance Inspections.

I have discussed this with my chain of command. For reasons not germane to this specific line item, that chain is pre-occupied with other matters at the moment. Before I reach out direct to NHQ I figured I'd use captalk to see if there was an example handy.

I don't understand why this is a concern of yours.  Nowhere in that regulation does it say that Squadron Commanders have anything to do with these JAC's....

It's a concern of mine because the need has been identified at the local level.

The alternative is to get the two counties across state lines to have their EM agencies sponsor CERT teams, cut CAP completely out of the loop and just log our ES participation as "community service" for a ribbon and leave everything else CAP related behind as well.

Maybe I'm just silly in trying to keep CAP involved on the ES side. But if that dual CERT program stands up with their own joint agreement, CAP ES in my area will drop from being almost dead to being embalmed and buried.

And that IS a concern of a squadron commander in the area.

[Flying Pig]

Have you actually contacted your Wing about this? Computer search is one thing, but, IIRC these are things they look for on the Compliance Inspections.

I have discussed this with my chain of command. For reasons not germane to this specific line item, that chain is pre-occupied with other matters at the moment. Before I reach out direct to NHQ I figured I'd use captalk to see if there was an example handy.

I don't understand why this is a concern of yours.  Nowhere in that regulation does it say that Squadron Commanders have anything to do with these JAC's....

It's a concern of mine because the need has been identified at the local level.

The alternative is to get the two counties across state lines to have their EM agencies sponsor CERT teams, cut CAP completely out of the loop and just log our ES participation as "community service" for a ribbon and leave everything else CAP related behind as well.

Maybe I'm just silly in trying to keep CAP involved on the ES side. But if that dual CERT program stands up with their own joint agreement, CAP ES in my area will drop from being almost dead to being embalmed and buried.

And that IS a concern of a squadron commander in the area.

:clap:

[Eclipse]

Have you actually contacted your Wing about this? Computer search is one thing, but, IIRC these are things they look for on the Compliance Inspections.

I have discussed this with my chain of command. For reasons not germane to this specific line item, that chain is pre-occupied with other matters at the moment. Before I reach out direct to NHQ I figured I'd use captalk to see if there was an example handy.

I don't understand why this is a concern of yours.  Nowhere in that regulation does it say that Squadron Commanders have anything to do with these JAC's....

It's a concern of mine because the need has been identified at the local level.

The alternative is to get the two counties across state lines to have their EM agencies sponsor CERT teams, cut CAP completely out of the loop and just log our ES participation as "community service" for a ribbon and leave everything else CAP related behind as well.

Maybe I'm just silly in trying to keep CAP involved on the ES side. But if that dual CERT program stands up with their own joint agreement, CAP ES in my area will drop from being almost dead to being embalmed and buried.

And that IS a concern of a squadron commander in the area.

What you're talking about is not an inter-wing agreement, you're talking about an inter-state agreement.
That will require your Wing DOS and CC involvement at a minimum and possibly Region and even NHQ, not to mention the
EMAs of the respective counties and the states.  If nothing else, an education in the politics-laden response framework
in the US is in your future.

What you say is that right now the other wing involves your unit, so that seems to be working and requires nothing
but current ops.  What more do you expect or want?

[Holding Pattern]

Have you actually contacted your Wing about this? Computer search is one thing, but, IIRC these are things they look for on the Compliance Inspections.

I have discussed this with my chain of command. For reasons not germane to this specific line item, that chain is pre-occupied with other matters at the moment. Before I reach out direct to NHQ I figured I'd use captalk to see if there was an example handy.

I don't understand why this is a concern of yours.  Nowhere in that regulation does it say that Squadron Commanders have anything to do with these JAC's....

It's a concern of mine because the need has been identified at the local level.

The alternative is to get the two counties across state lines to have their EM agencies sponsor CERT teams, cut CAP completely out of the loop and just log our ES participation as "community service" for a ribbon and leave everything else CAP related behind as well.

Maybe I'm just silly in trying to keep CAP involved on the ES side. But if that dual CERT program stands up with their own joint agreement, CAP ES in my area will drop from being almost dead to being embalmed and buried.

And that IS a concern of a squadron commander in the area.

What you're talking about is not an inter-wing agreement, you're talking about an inter-state agreement.
That will require your Wing DOS and CC involvement at a minimum and possibly Region and even NHQ, not to mention the
EMAs of the respective counties and the states.  If nothing else, an education in the politics-laden response framework
in the US is in your future.

What you say is that right now the other wing involves your unit, so that seems to be working and requires nothing
but current ops.  What more do you expect or want?

If everything was working just dandy I wouldn't be asking on captalk for an example doc on how to make this work better.

The regulations provide a mechanism by which I can make things better. I'm exploring that option.

[Eclipse]

Fair enough - it's not going to be "a doc", it's almost certainly going to be an agreement, vetted by
legal, that is a response MOU.

What you're referring to in the regs you posted, are essentially OIs that, for example, say "members may fly
with 50nm of bordering wings without prior notice or approval (my Region used to have that BITD).

If you see an opportunity to get CAP ES work, good on 'ye, but because you're crossing wings and states,
this far exceeds a Unit CC's mandate or ability to commit resources (which you can't do formally anyway),
so your role here is to document the need, and send it up the chain, then followup with phones calls,
understanding that from there it's above your pay grade.