Where on my Battle Dress Uniform do I put my encampment patch? Thanks in advance!
You don't
Do I wear it at all? Thanks for replying by the way!
CAPM 39-1 Attachment 4 will detail all patches and badges authorized and their placement on each uniform. Encampment patches are not an approved activity patch to be worn on any uniform. If you received one, it was likely commemorative.
Unfortunately, no, you would not ever wear it in uniform. To elaborate. An encampment patch is not one of the authorized patches on the BDUs. You can find a list of approved patches in CAPM 39-1 in attachment 4 and attachment 8.
While many encampment do develop a patch that is used on many encampment materials, there are no regulatory provisions for their wear in uniform. It's more to standardize the look of shirts, certificates, and marketing material for the encampment (many encampment won't ever have the actual patch produced and will just use the image). When the actual patch is produced it is just for display, for example framed along with your completion certificate.
You are able to wear the patch given at Basic Encampment. There is a NJWG Supplement to CAPM 39-1, which will answer your question on placement.
Quote from: _Toth_ on August 24, 2015, 03:03:44 PM
Where on my Battle Dress Uniform do I put my encampment patch? Thanks in advance!
Cool. I used to command your unit....
Save the space on your uni for other insignia. I have a sleeve full of those patches and I have them on a bulletin board in my office. Do you really want to swap out a patch every time you staff and encampment? Neither did I...
Quote from: THRAWN on August 24, 2015, 07:04:57 PM
Quote from: _Toth_ on August 24, 2015, 03:03:44 PM
Where on my Battle Dress Uniform do I put my encampment patch? Thanks in advance!
Cool. I used to command your unit....
Save the space on your uni for other insignia. I have a sleeve full of those patches and I have them on a bulletin board in my office. Do you really want to swap out a patch every time you staff and encampment? Neither did I...
Agreed with saving the space. While encampment is important, it is just a stepping stone to a load of CAP fun. You will quickly want to replace that patch with an NCSA patch next year more than likely. I have never even heard of an encampment patch. I wonder how many wings actually create one?
Activity patches are not one of the items permitted for wing commanders to authorize.
Wing commanders may authorize unit patches. Those are authorized by 39-1, have a designated placement, and are specifically permitted.
Quote from: JC004 on August 24, 2015, 11:33:16 PM
Activity patches are not one of the items permitted for wing commanders to authorize.
Wing commanders may authorize unit patches. Those are authorized by 39-1, have a designated placement, and are specifically permitted.
While CAPM 39-1 provides a list of approved patches, it does not prohibit other patches from being approved through a supplement. And since supplements to CAPM 39-1 must be coordinated with higher headquarters, one can assume any additions not specifically prohibited by CAPM 39-1 would be valid. In this case, only NHQ or NER can invalidate this supplement or the patch in question, assuming there's an approved supplement.
That is how laws work. That is not how the uniform manual works.
NJWG, for example, has also been known to authorize colored shirts for SAR competitions and such. These are not authorized.
Some items have been especially problematic, so they have been specifically mentioned - like bayonets.
Quote
1.1.2.1. COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This publication is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various uniform combinations as prescribed within. Variation from this publication is not authorized. Items not listed in this publication are not authorized for wear with uniforms.
Quote
2.8.4. The Wing Commander has the authority to approve certain items of uniform wear within their wing as outlined in paragraph 9.4.
Quote
9.4. Items which May be Authorized by Wing Commander. Wing Commanders may authorize the following items to be worn for specific purposes within their respective wing or within specific units of their wing. Commanders will not use this authority to circumvent National policy. In all cases, these items will have no national significance or recognition as a part of the CAP uniform. They will not be worn at region or national events (cadet exchange, special activities, etc.), unless specifically authorized by the sponsoring region headquarters or NHQ. They may be worn only while performing the duty for which the use of the items was authorized. Wing/region approved items will be worn only within the boundaries of the authorizing commander.
9.4.1. Shoulder Cords.
9.4.2. Scarves.
9.4.3. White Gloves.
9.4.4. White and black belts.
9.4.5. Helmet liners/Hardhat.
9.4.6. Beret.
One should most definitely not assume they carry endorsement, because endorsement is specifically addressed in publication management. Those supplements with an endorsement denote such endorsement in the top right-hand corner of page one of the supplement, with the office symbol and date.
There are dozens of encampments. If national wanted wings creating encampment patches, certainly this would be addressed.
Personally, I used patches not authorized for wear as things to put on my luggage and/or laptop bags. Makes baggage claim easier when you end up on that flight where everyone has the same luggage.
Quote from: JC004 on August 25, 2015, 07:20:13 PM
That is how laws work. That is not how the uniform manual works.
NJWG, for example, has also been known to authorize colored shirts for SAR competitions and such. These are not authorized.
Some items have been especially problematic, so they have been specifically mentioned - like bayonets.
Quote
1.1.2.1. COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This publication is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various uniform combinations as prescribed within. Variation from this publication is not authorized. Items not listed in this publication are not authorized for wear with uniforms.
Quote
2.8.4. The Wing Commander has the authority to approve certain items of uniform wear within their wing as outlined in paragraph 9.4.
Quote
9.4. Items which May be Authorized by Wing Commander. Wing Commanders may authorize the following items to be worn for specific purposes within their respective wing or within specific units of their wing. Commanders will not use this authority to circumvent National policy. In all cases, these items will have no national significance or recognition as a part of the CAP uniform. They will not be worn at region or national events (cadet exchange, special activities, etc.), unless specifically authorized by the sponsoring region headquarters or NHQ. They may be worn only while performing the duty for which the use of the items was authorized. Wing/region approved items will be worn only within the boundaries of the authorizing commander.
9.4.1. Shoulder Cords.
9.4.2. Scarves.
9.4.3. White Gloves.
9.4.4. White and black belts.
9.4.5. Helmet liners/Hardhat.
9.4.6. Beret.
One should most definitely not assume they carry endorsement, because endorsement is specifically addressed in publication management. Those supplements with an endorsement denote such endorsement in the top right-hand corner of page one of the supplement, with the office symbol and date.
There are dozens of encampments. If national wanted wings creating encampment patches, certainly this would be addressed.
The way I read this regulation, the wing commander could approve any of these items listed without a supplement because his or her authority to do so it's already spelled out in the manual. Now, a supplement requires higher headquarters coordination and, presumably, approval. It is up to the NER/CC or CAP/CC to address the validity of this supplement. Anyone else can only offer opinions.
What else could they change?
Do you have this specific supplement?
Despite how we think regulations are supposed to go.
If an echelon commander has authorized verbally or in writing.....then it is, unfortunately, legal.
It is up to that commander's chain of command to do something about it.
So....despite what I said in my first post......the correct answer to the OP is to check with YOUR chain of command for guidance.
If anyone else has a problem with NJWG's policies....then it is our duty and right to take our gripe up our chain of command until we get to someone who can do something about it.
Quote from: Storm Chaser on August 25, 2015, 09:07:04 PM
Quote from: JC004 on August 25, 2015, 07:20:13 PM
That is how laws work. That is not how the uniform manual works.
NJWG, for example, has also been known to authorize colored shirts for SAR competitions and such. These are not authorized.
Some items have been especially problematic, so they have been specifically mentioned - like bayonets.
Quote
1.1.2.1. COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY. This publication is the sole source for wear instructions and authorized items for various uniform combinations as prescribed within. Variation from this publication is not authorized. Items not listed in this publication are not authorized for wear with uniforms.
Quote
2.8.4. The Wing Commander has the authority to approve certain items of uniform wear within their wing as outlined in paragraph 9.4.
Quote
9.4. Items which May be Authorized by Wing Commander. Wing Commanders may authorize the following items to be worn for specific purposes within their respective wing or within specific units of their wing. Commanders will not use this authority to circumvent National policy. In all cases, these items will have no national significance or recognition as a part of the CAP uniform. They will not be worn at region or national events (cadet exchange, special activities, etc.), unless specifically authorized by the sponsoring region headquarters or NHQ. They may be worn only while performing the duty for which the use of the items was authorized. Wing/region approved items will be worn only within the boundaries of the authorizing commander.
9.4.1. Shoulder Cords.
9.4.2. Scarves.
9.4.3. White Gloves.
9.4.4. White and black belts.
9.4.5. Helmet liners/Hardhat.
9.4.6. Beret.
One should most definitely not assume they carry endorsement, because endorsement is specifically addressed in publication management. Those supplements with an endorsement denote such endorsement in the top right-hand corner of page one of the supplement, with the office symbol and date.
There are dozens of encampments. If national wanted wings creating encampment patches, certainly this would be addressed.
The way I read this regulation, the wing commander could approve any of these items listed without a supplement because his or her authority to do so it's already spelled out in the manual. Now, a supplement requires higher headquarters coordination and, presumably, approval. It is up to the NER/CC or CAP/CC to address the validity of this supplement. Anyone else can only offer opinions.
A cursory look at several other Wing Supplements, some also contain guidance for Wing Specific Activity patches (NJ and MN first couple hits via google). The real question comes to what JC004 mentioned and outside of what is published in CAPM 39-1, what else do Wing Commanders have the authority to authorize?
But at the end of the day, lordmonar is correct, local guidance will ultimately supersede those on a forum.
I should like to see the most recent supplement in this particular example. I don't like to talk about a thing I have not seen - even if it plays little role in higher headquarters requirements. Plus, it is an issue of national concern - I wouldn't say one command should be picked on.
The question is....what supersedes what in terms of regulation? In law, there is preemption. For example, a local government (here) could not prohibit possession of a firearm in a town park because only the state can make such a law. They do it anyway. I see it on rules signs at parks. They're wrong, and if I felt like carrying a firearm at that park, the rule (local ordinance) would have no legal authority.
It is clear that national intends to preempt certain local policies. For example, a commander can't change 60-3 requirements for qualifications in order to accommodate a goal of qualifying everyone at an ES weekend as a GTM. In the case of 60-3, wings can (and have) publish a supplement without permission from NHQ, but national preempts that authority. I've also seen things like a commander "suspending" CPFT requirements in order to get all cadets promoted and "improve morale." (there's no reason to point fingers at individuals for these)
If I were in such a situation, I'd probably do something like write a proposal outlining ways to encourage encampment participation, propose a ball cap to replace a t-shirt of unauthorized design, etc. I'd advocate offering solutions and a replacement - preferably something more effective than what's being replaced.
JC004, The only supplement that I could find for NJWG is dated 1 Sept 2010 via their wing website. Also NER has a supplement to CAPM 39-1 authorizing wear of an RCLS patch. So we can assume this is with the legal confines of Wing/Region Commander authority. If it not, then there is major disconnect at all levels.
A large majority of this is an issue facing all Wings with respect to "my (brother, cousin, uncle, Squadron Commander, CAC Chairperson, etc.) said this is approved so I did it". Along with, "Well, 39-1 doesn't specifically prohibit this, so that means I can do it". But, we've been dealing with this mindset for decades.
But at the end of the day, if a Cadet's local chain of command says Cadet Snuffy can wear the patch because of the wing supplement or what they were told at Encampment graduation, then I'm cool with that and not going to have heartburn.
Do I personally think that an Encampment Patch will boost Encampment participation? No, but everyone has their own intrinsic and extrinsic value on activities. YMMV.