ES Officer (CAPP213)

[Meridius]

Tried to search this topic; so...

I am completing my first year as an ES Officer and was compiling my accomplishments and I have been working through the requirements for the technician rating.  Many appear obsolete, especially 116, parts a and b (I remember taking those tests in 2003 in which some of that was replaced with FEMA courses).  ES 00213 is not available and it seems like it was going to be replaced with rating specific content and tests similar to ops officer, etc.  Another task was to review the unit's es library to ensure completeness of the library.  The last was probably written before the proliferation of the internet, but I literally carry the related "library" of ES and Operations related CAP regulations in a binder and on a flash drive for easy access.

Questions:

Thus, will the ES Officer CAPP 213 ever be updated?  If so, what is the status of this update?  And, will the required, plus, associated FEMA courses (IS 100 through 400, possibly damage assessment/relief, MARC, PODS, VRC, [list could go on] be updated?  NSAR requirements?  Required role in Wing Operations still be required as opposed to a functional Group requirement (insert Advanced GSAR team and/or advanced airborne operations)?  What entity is in charge of updated this career field?

While I am committed to this career field, I am having some troubles encouraging others to enter it do to time requirements not consistent with other career fields and a general feeling that the "ES officer is becoming obsolete itself."  I personally disagree in part and agree.  My agreement is that the ES Officer appears to be changing more of an Emergency Management role and not becoming obsolete even though parts of the pamphlet have definitely become obsolete.[/list]

[Eclipse]

I'm note sure I understand the statement about time requirements - if anything these is little to nothing to do
day to day anymore thanks to Ops Quals and WMIRS.

You can maintain a library if you like, but the internet handles that for you - your flash drive isn't any more accessible to members then
copies of tasks guides in your basement.

The primary role these days is insuring any higher HQ training and qualification goals are met, connecting your members with training
opportunities or scheduling them yourself, and fostering relationships with potential customers inside your echelon's AOR.

That and being knowledgeable and active yourself in ES so you can speak with authority and answer questions.

Various staff in the Operations directorate have been threatening to update the ES curriculum for at least a decade,
along with the corresponding specialty tracks.

The problem is that CAP doesn't do "iterative change", so instead of minor updates, fixing typos, balancing conflicting verbiage, and
generally cleaning house on a regular basis, it requires every SME in ear shot to have a say in recreating everything from the ground up,
and "by committee", ultimately publishing nothing, or releasing things based on arbitrary "goals", which wind up being rushed out the door broken.

With 1AF's involvement in CAP being focused on Operations, perhaps that will spur a renewed interest in moving this along and fixing the issues,
but even if they started today, it's a multi-year process to get that done, and even more years to implement and transition (consider CAP can't change the
clothes it wears in less then 5 years, apparently).

And this is within a paradigm where CAP, as a whole, doesn't really know what it's actual ES mission is anymore, nor how it translates into
real-world tasking locally, and while at the same time membership is on the decline due to aging, interest, and the other typical factors.

[Meridius]

Time requirements:  ES Officer 3 years with a specialty qualification to obtain senior rating (1 year duty assignment as ES Officer).  Ops Officer: 1 year duty assignment for senior rating.  Master is 5 years in specialty qualification and  3 years in duty assignment at Wing or higher echelon, whereas it is 2 years for Ops.  I can see morphing ES Officer with Ops Officer even though one appears more ground oriented whereby the ops officer is more air oriented.  Primarily, I verify and recommend ops qualifications.  I also have written squadron SOP and op plans.  I am enrolled in both ES and Ops, but I am more ground team oriented.  Btw, I carry that stuff with me because many of our training exercises are in areas where there is no internet or cell coverage (that was a lesson learned).

While it may seem that I am making issue out of time requirements, I am not all that interested changing it.  I am interested in a robust change to the ES officer that does reflect today's use of WMIRS and the apparent shift in the ES function (ES meaning Operations in this case) and CAP's commitment to Cadet Programs, Aerospace Education and Emergency Services.

I agree that it appears that our ground operations have been muted by professional SAR teams from county and city operations.  Our focus (ground) has been disaster operations and relief (my real job is Dam Safety and hydrology at a regional scale).  Therefore, I mission training is going to push more towards disaster relief at a squadron level even though we have a strong Ranger team and involvement with both NC and PA ranger activities.  At the Wing echelon, we probably should establish a "professional" ground team and market to the State and County Emergency Managers more efficiently.  Basically, it comes down to "who are you?" and "why do you have so many kids?" when that County Sheriff is in charge of the missing person search.

[Eclipse]

I thought you meant "time requirements" as in "to much to do every week".

You raise a legit point, however in that regard it kinda mirrors the general suppression of the field grades which is going to
start happening in earnest in 2018.

My master is in CP, it occurred as much by happenstance of being involved with the encampment program as anything else.
I'm about 3 or 4 months short of ES master because of the staff requirements, and not likely to ever make it.  Had I needed
that for LIV and Lt  Col, I might still be a major.

That's something I've been discussing with new seniors - what specialty track to pursue if FG is really important, because it's
going to require service at higher echelons at some point.

I hate to see people who only pursue one track because it was expedient or "what I do in CAP", and then 10 years later they realize they
have to start over for those bottle caps, because doing "x" at the wing or higher isn't going to happen.

[Meridius]

I have not heard about the suppression of field grade, but then I am not surprised either.  New requirements going to require college and/or command and staff time to put us more on par with the Air Force?  If that is the direction, then the NCO and Flight Officer ranks should be utilized more.  (I know that probably pisses off half the readers; oh well I am an equal opportunity offender.)

Our model for recruitment and retention needs to change so well can get qualified seniors and provide for more robust "volunteer" opportunities w/i the community.  ES can be that vehicle as well as aerospace and cadet operations.  Under the 1AF, maybe our mission suite will grow, but I amazed at how people will inquire about CAP and run away.  We need quality people in our ES program beyond our air capabilities.

[Eclipse]

I have not heard about the suppression of field grade, but then I am not surprised either.  New requirements going to require college and/or command and staff time to put us more on par with the Air Force? 

Starting in 2018 (or now for those who already got their last click in under the old system), TIG is increased for most grades, up to an additional year
for Major and Lt Col, but more importantly, LIV will be required for Major and LV for Lt Col.  Since those levels require week-long in-residence
classes, that will limit those who are able to reach for field grades.  Since NSC is only run once a year and and for a relatively small group of
members, the number of Lt Cols approved in any calendar year is going to likely drop to under 200 nationwide.

Our model for recruitment and retention needs to change so well can get qualified seniors and provide for more robust "volunteer" opportunities w/i the community.  ES can be that vehicle as well as aerospace and cadet operations.  Under the 1AF, maybe our mission suite will grow, but I amazed at how people will inquire about CAP and run away.  We need quality people in our ES program beyond our air capabilities.

I share the hope, but don't hold your breath.  Most of the professional-types who CAP would want are already involved in ES, professionally, or in other volunteer
organizations.   CAP has always depended on growing staff organically from the community-minded, but unschooled, general public.  If CAP
were to start raising the bar on entry in an effort build a better, more capable force, that will just shrink the already too small pool of people interested.

Defining what the mission "is" would help as well.