CAPM 39-1 REVISIONS GAME

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Besides, why do we bother with what Army, or Marines do, as has been said here many times, we are not Army or Marines. Our connection is USAF, so long as we are connected with USAF, we should and most likely will have the USAF style uniforms. 

The reference to the Army and Marines was a reference to how those organizations maintain a uniform image across thier organization.  No statement was made that we should in some way, mimic those services.  It was used to point out that CAP does not appear uniform across it's organization. 

Not true as you state it. I have been in many many many formations while is was in the Army, almost one every day. We have had personnel in greens, others in flight suits, and most in BDU or ACU. You aren't going to get the overall "uniformity" that you want, ever. The purpose of the uniform is to look like everyone else in that uniform other than your personal awards. It is not to make every possible uniform combination the same, just to make those in BDU look like those in BDU, those in blues look like those in blues, those in BBDU like those in BBDU, and those in the aviator uniform like those in the aviator uniform. You want to get everyone in one uniform and only one uniform? Then you are going to have to get rid of all uniforms but one, and knowing CAP and the three missions, I bet you can guess which uniform that would be, either BDU or BBDU.
I mean no disrespect sir at all.

[Major Carrales]

I had resisted commenting on this thread and have allowed discussion to mature before posting.

The simple fact that the creation, tampering with and alteration of CAP uniforms has been one lacking in organized planning, structure and coordination in the past (with no guarantee that this will change) would seem to always perpetuate this issue with CAPM 39-1.

There is no need for a "split" manual, nor any such radical action.

What is called for is 1)  a true standing committee that reviews all proposed uniform changes and measures them against the benchmark of member expense and true necessity, 2) a 5-10 year moratorium on uniform changes (pending only radical change in the style of USAF counterparts), 3) an end to "willy-nilly" additions to it...for example, all the "I-got-a-good-idea-for a new award/patch/badge" as well as higher level uniform "pet projects."

The committee mentioned above has to be serious about maintaining an ascetically pleasing uniform and MUST TAKE THE COST TO THE MEMBERSHIP TO HEART in the process.  People don't stop to realize that what seem like minor changes or alterations (such as additional patches, required insignia and the like) actually do cost money to NON-PAID members who, many times, give a great deal already of their own finance to make things happen.

The moratorium on major uniform changes (like creating uniform combos, changing positions and designs of badges, creating a slew of ribbons, badges...or replacing existing badges for no more reason that "THEY LOOK BETTER.") will save time, money and unnecessary legwork for memebrs.

There is no need to have "Imperial" uniforms, that is, that some change MUST be made when new leadership comes in like the "coins of the realm" did in other empires to demonstrate a NEW ERA.  Sometimes someone "up there" gets an idea and then, because of position, make it happen.  One thing that, in my opinion, seems to have become that way via default is the "NATIONAL COMMANDER'S UNIT CITATION'" (the "blue hornet," if you will) that was issued for Hurricane Katrina and Rita to several Wings that has never been reissued for any event I am aware of (could be wrong). 

Maybe what we need instead of a CAP Manual outright, is instead what has been suggested from time to time here...some "corollary" to USAF uniform literature that preserves the overall wear of the USAF style uniform to conform to how it is worn in CAP.  Thus, the overall "base" uniform remains as is worn in the USAF, only the CAP document alters the wear to reflect CAP insignia et al.

Thus, all changes are automatic and the only revisions involve where to place insignia.  Also, the USAF would have the desired control of the wear of the uniform from the most basic level.  Pages about the "white/grays" and other uniforms would be the only CAP "uniform."   Thus, there would still be two styles "USAF STYLE" and "CAP Style."  If kept in check and specific uses for uniform wear were maintained (for example all Mission Staff Personnel could wear some version of blues while all field ES personnel would wear BDUs and Flight suits...that's only an example for illustrative purposes so sand down Eclipse and others.)

[sleepyboyd]

You want to get everyone in one uniform and only one uniform? Then you are going to have to get rid of all uniforms but one, and knowing CAP and the three missions, I bet you can guess which uniform that would be, either BDU or BBDU.

I never said one uniform for everyone... I said one line of uniform.  Meaning, Aviators, Polo's, and BDU's or BBDU's... BBDU's might be better than BDU's..  When was the last time any CAP member needed to evade from someone in modern times?  Its silly to me, that we covet the USAF style BDU, and then place colorful patches on it, and then wear a safety vest in the field over it.  Why be camo in the first place?  Do we feel some need to "look" military? We aren't.  we are not a reserve, we are not a guard, we are an auxilliary... and as such (short of a beach landing by the chinese, or some type of "Red Dawn" scenerio), will never need to be "clandestine" or "camo'd" at anytime.

Why have a unit change of command (for example), and have some folks in aviators, and some in blues?  Why couldn't we all be in aviators?  We always try to mirror active duty, but they don't have a "alternative" uniform for members who are big or unshaven.  No, they have a uniform line that is worn by all of its members.

I mean no disrespect sir at all.

Its a forum for discussion... why would I take offense to your point of view?

[manfredvonrichthofen]

You want to get everyone in one uniform and only one uniform? Then you are going to have to get rid of all uniforms but one, and knowing CAP and the three missions, I bet you can guess which uniform that would be, either BDU or BBDU.

I never said one uniform for everyone... I said one line of uniform.  Meaning, Aviators, Polo's, and BDU's or BBDU's... BBDU's might be better than BDU's..  When was the last time any CAP member needed to evade from someone in modern times?  Its silly to me, that we covet the USAF style BDU, and then place colorful patches on it, and then wear a safety vest in the field over it.  Why be camo in the first place?  Do we feel some need to "look" military? We aren't.  we are not a reserve, we are not a guard, we are an auxilliary... and as such (short of a beach landing by the chinese, or some type of "Red Dawn" scenerio), will never need to be "clandestine" or "camo'd" at anytime.

Why have a unit change of command (for example), and have some folks in aviators, and some in blues?  Why couldn't we all be in aviators?  We always try to mirror active duty, but they don't have a "alternative" uniform for members who are big or unshaven.  No, they have a uniform line that is worn by all of its members.

I mean no disrespect sir at all.

Its a forum for discussion... why would I take offense to your point of view?

If an Auxiliary has no purpose being in the same uniform as their active counterpart then I guess auxiliary police shouldn't be in their active police's uniform either should they?
It has nothing to do with needing to blend in or hide or anything of the sort. It has to do with our link to the USAF.

[sleepyboyd]

Maybe what we need instead of a CAP Manual outright, is instead what has been suggested from time to time here...some "corollary" to USAF uniform literature that preserves the overall wear of the USAF style uniform to conform to how it is worn in CAP.  Thus, the overall "base" uniform remains as is worn in the USAF, only the CAP document alters the wear to reflect CAP insignia et al.

Thus, all changes are automatic and the only revisions involve where to place insignia.  Also, the USAF would have the desired control of the wear of the uniform from the most basic level.  Pages about the "white/grays" and other uniforms would be the only CAP "uniform."   Thus, there would still be two styles "USAF STYLE" and "CAP Style."  If kept in check and specific uses for uniform wear were maintained (for example all Mission Staff Personnel could wear some version of blues while all field ES personnel would wear BDUs and Flight suits...that's only an example for illustrative purposes so sand down Eclipse and others.)

I actually really like this.  Most people always point to the USAF regs as arguments for certain uniform issues, when our regulation says nothing about this practice.  I like this.

If an Auxiliary has no purpose being in the same uniform as their active counterpart then I guess auxiliary police shouldn't be in their active police's uniform either should they?
It has nothing to do with needing to blend in or hide or anything of the sort. It has to do with our link to the USAF.

Those same Auxilliary police are all in the same uniform line as well.  Meaning, they don't put the fat ones in a different set of shirts and slacks... 

If we had strict weight and fitness standards members needed to meet, then we could all wear the AF style uniform, and I would have no problem with that.... but we don't.  We take EO training to be more inclusive, and then force the fat guys and the bearded ones into another uniform line.

I truely understand where you are comming from.  Our history and our service are directly linked to the USAF.  I wear the AF style uniform because 1) I fit the profile, and 2) I already have them from work, and it's cheaper on me.  However, I'm just suggesting that we all wear the same line of uniform... and Big Blue isnt going to let "all of us" wear thier uniform, and bring discredit to it by looking out of shape in it.

[RADIOMAN015]

What is called for is 1)  a true standing committee that reviews all proposed uniform changes and measures them against the benchmark of member expense and true necessity, 2) a 5-10 year moratorium on uniform changes (pending only radical change in the style of USAF counterparts), 3) an end to "willy-nilly" additions to it...for example, all the "I-got-a-good-idea-for a new award/patch/badge" as well as higher level uniform "pet projects."

The committee mentioned above has to be serious about maintaining an ascetically pleasing uniform and MUST TAKE THE COST TO THE MEMBERSHIP TO HEART in the process.  People don't stop to realize that what seem like minor changes or alterations (such as additional patches, required insignia and the like) actually do cost money to NON-PAID members who, many times, give a great deal already of their own finance to make things happen.

I agree with you that overall costs to the membership needs to be a priority in any uniform changes.   For example a move to the new ABU's/ACU's that the AF is using, would likely cost the member over $200.00 for everything needed to wear the uniform properly (including outer jacket).   Even cadets getting "free" uniforms are likely going to have to spend close to another $100.00 (shoes, insignias, patches, etc) just to be in compliance.

Many CAP members seem to place way to much emphasis on uniforms than is necessary
RM 

[HGjunkie]

We could always go down the reasonable route and keep the BDUs. There's nothing wrong with them.

[caphornbuckle]

*Ahem*

ACU/ABU's are not current uniform items thus breaking rule 1 of the game.

[Eclipse]

Actually, the first rule is not to talk about it, though that is probably technically rule "0".

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Actually, the first rule is not to talk about it, though that is probably technically rule "0".

The first rule of CAPTalk, we do not talk about CAPTalk.
The second rule of CAPTalk, we do not talk about CAPTalk.
The third rule of CAPTalk, if this is your first thread, you will be trashed.

[SARDOC]

Actually, the first rule is not to talk about it, though that is probably technically rule "0".

The first rule of Fight Club...Don't talk about fight club.

[FARRIER]

I never said one uniform for everyone... I said one line of uniform.  Meaning, Aviators, Polo's, and BDU's or BBDU's... BBDU's might be better than BDU's..  When was the last time any CAP member needed to evade from someone in modern times?  Its silly to me, that we covet the USAF style BDU, and then place colorful patches on it, and then wear a safety vest in the field over it.  Why be camo in the first place?  Do we feel some need to "look" military? We aren't.  we are not a reserve, we are not a guard, we are an auxilliary... and as such (short of a beach landing by the chinese, or some type of "Red Dawn" scenerio), will never need to be "clandestine" or "camo'd" at anytime.

The camo argument has always been a strawman argument. CAP has always worn the uniform that the Air Force has worn, be it the green utilities (I still have mine) that ended in the late eighties early nineties, and the khaki's (which was before my time). Even during WW 2, with the exception of red epaulets, we wore the uniform of the Army Air Forces. That has been our history, our tradition. The adding and evolution of the aviators has been a positive for those in our organization that don't meet the weight and/or grooming requirements, but stripping the military uniforms from those that meet the grooming and weight requirements will only destroy that connection to our history and tradition.

[BillB]

The red epaulets were removed after about a year and the CAP uniforms were identical to Army Air Corp uniforms except for insignia. Even cadet NCO grades were identical to the military. For awhile the NCO grades had a red background, like the Marine Corp, but were changed to standard Army stripes. During the War, CAP had a large NCO Corp for ground duty assignments. And NCOs could be promoted.

[davedove]

Back to the OP, the one thing that really needs to be done right now is an update incorporating all the ICL's to CAPM 39-1.  We can worry about changes later, but we really need the manual to reflect all the CURRENT requirements.

Although, I suspect they are waiting for the CPU expiration date so that they don't have to include it.

[CAP_truth]

Why don't we just set up the uniform manual in sections that can be changed as needed and not have to upgrade the entire manual each time there is a uniform change. These sections will have a review every two years and would be upgraded at that time. This would also give the uniform committee a two year window to work on revisions and approval.

[JoeTomasone]

Back to the OP, the one thing that really needs to be done right now is an update incorporating all the ICL's to CAPM 39-1.  We can worry about changes later, but we really need the manual to reflect all the CURRENT requirements.

Although, I suspect they are waiting for the CPU expiration date so that they don't have to include it.

What is the CPU?


And not to be a PITA, but if we're going to play by the regs, then the ICLs are all invalid anyway (since by regulations, ICLs can only be issued for emergency, non-routine items and must be incorporated into their parent regulation within 180 days).    So that leaves a lot OFF the table.

[davedove]

Back to the OP, the one thing that really needs to be done right now is an update incorporating all the ICL's to CAPM 39-1.  We can worry about changes later, but we really need the manual to reflect all the CURRENT requirements.

Although, I suspect they are waiting for the CPU expiration date so that they don't have to include it.

What is the CPU?


And not to be a PITA, but if we're going to play by the regs, then the ICLs are all invalid anyway (since by regulations, ICLs can only be issued for emergency, non-routine items and must be incorporated into their parent regulation within 180 days).    So that leaves a lot OFF the table.

Oops!   I missed that in my edit.  I meant CSU, the Corporate Service Uniform, which is being eliminated.

Actually, I never interpreted the ICL regs to say that the ICU's expire.  Yes, the regs require them to be incorporated within 180 days, but it doesn't say they expire if that doesn't happen.  The way I read it, only the ICL's with expiration dates included expire.  Now, National is certainly in violation of the regs if they don't do it, but I guess nobody's pushing the issue at a high enough level.

[arajca]

IMHO, the manual needs to be restructured. Instead of AF style, Corporate, etc, use Dress, Service, Work, Flight. If a particular uniform fits in multiple sections, have the full description in the first section and a reference to that in the other sections. This helps avoid internal conflicts (i.e. updating the golf shirt in one section, but not in all sections.)

My idea has the following:

Dress uniforms:
- AF Service Dress
- CAP Service Dress (aka CSU)
- Blazer
- Mess Dress
- Semi Formal AF Service
- Semi Formal CAP Service
- Semi Formal Blazer

Service uniforms:
- AF Service uniform
-- Short Sleeve
-- Long sleve
- CAP Service uniform (aka Aviator Shirt)
-- Short Sleeve
-- Long Sleeve
- Golf/Polo Shirt

Work uniform:
- Battle Dress Uniform
- Field Uniform (aka bbdu)
- Utility Uniform
- Golf/Polo Shirt

Flight unifrom:
- Sage green flight suit
- Navy blue flight suit
- Utility Uniform
- Golf/Polo Shirt

Outerwear information is included with each uniform description, i.e. the camo field jacket is included with the bdu, while the blue field jacket is included with the bbdu.

A separate manual needs to be created to describe and show the authorized accoutrements. Placement would still be in the uniform manual (all placement instructions are included in the particluar uniform section), but the lists and pictures would be in the accoutrements manual. (One Specialty Badge is authorized for wear centered on the lower portion of the left and right breast pockets. See CAPM 39-2, CAP Uniform Accoutrements, for a list of Specialty Badges.)

This structure would help promote a more equal impression between the AF style and Corporate uniforms. Using common terminology (AF Service/CAP Service vs AF Service/Aviator Shirt) helps reinforce the equality issue as well.

[JoeTomasone]

Actually, I never interpreted the ICL regs to say that the ICU's expire.  Yes, the regs require them to be incorporated within 180 days, but it doesn't say they expire if that doesn't happen.  The way I read it, only the ICL's with expiration dates included expire.  Now, National is certainly in violation of the regs if they don't do it, but I guess nobody's pushing the issue at a high enough level.

Here's what the reg (CAPR 5-4) actually says, emphasis and comments mine:

4. Interim Change Letters (ICL). Situations requiring immediate action due to a state of emergency, an unforeseen circumstance involving the preservation of life or property, or other contingencies that may require prompt action may result in an interim change letter being issued outlining immediate policies. ICLs may be issued by any level of command unless specifically limited or prohibited by the regulation or manual governing that subject matter. Issuance of policies by ICL is a temporary measure.

ICLs are to be issued for urgent issues, not routine ones (i.e. uniforms).

a. ICLs outlining immediate policies to be followed for a limited time will be issued with a stated expiration date. Such expiration dates shall not be more than 180 days from the date the letter was issued.

So if it's temporary, it must have an expiration date, which is not to exceed 180 days.

b. ICLs outlining immediate policies that are intended to become permanent shall be incorporated into an appropriate publication within 90 days of the date the letter was issued.

"Shall be" == mandatory.


So, to sum:

1. You cannot issue ICLs for uniform matters as they are not "Situations requiring immediate action due to a state of emergency, an unforeseen circumstance involving the preservation of life or property, or other contingencies that may require prompt action". 

2. However, should you try to squeeze it into the "other contingencies that may require prompt action" category, it "SHALL BE" incorporated into the appropriate publication within 90 days. 

3. Since (by the logical interpretation of the regs) you cannot issue ICLs for uniform matters and even if you could each failed to be incorporated into 39-1 within 90 days, they can not (any longer) be considered valid.   


Your honor, the barracks lawyer rests.

[HGjunkie]

So, are the ICL's valid or not?