In another thread the members of CAP-Talk were asked to submit suggestions for changes to 60-3 by a member of the NHQ ES committee. Here is a place for us to discuss such suggestions. I'll put up some thoughts soon.
I've got one....it is just a rough idea right now...but I will start to flesh it out and do a white paper on it.
Ground team qualifications.
Instead of the 4-5 levels we have now (GTM3, 2, 1, GTL, and GBD)...I propose we change it to just 3 levels.
Ground Team Trainee (GTT)
Groud Team Member (GTM)
Ground Team Leader (GTL)
Ground Branch Director (GBD)
Here is my basic idea.
The GTT would be just that a trainee. It will consist of all the "classroom"/lecutre tasks and more map reading and performance tasks that are currently stuck in the GTM 2 and GTM 1 areas. It will still require two "sorties" but these cannot be part of a SAREX or real SAR sortie. They will be field exercises in a controlled enviornment designed test their field surivival skills.
The purpose of the GTT is so when a person is GTT qualified we know that they can take care of them selves in they get seperated in the field. A GTT qualified individual CAN go on a SARES or real SAR as a GTM trainee....but a GTT trainee cannot.
GTM would be the remaining tasks for GTM1 and 2 but we will remove all of the "leader" tasks.
GTL will be only the leader tasks currently in the GTL SQTR....you must be a fully qualified GTM before you can go for GTL (i.e. you can't jump straight from GTT to GTL).
GBD will be more or less the same as it is now.
The GT badge will only be awarded for GTMs.
As this applies to NESA we could make GTT a requirement before attending the basic course. The GTL course can focuse more on small team leadership and teaching instead of basic skill building. The GTM Advance course can be a repeat for the basic course with a focus of sharpening up the GT skills (i.e. more of the same but with stricter standards).
On a seperate issue....SETs qualification. I would make this a SQTR sepcialty that actually reuired the individual to do live training and course development under the supervision of a mentor prior to being qualified.
I would also like to establish an Instructor qualification is the various specialty areas. Being a GT instructor does not automatically mean that you are qualified to be a Scanner Insutructor.
As I said I will work on more specific details over the next few weeks.
SET is on the NB agenda. Something like 1 yr experience in a qualification and SQ/CC' s permission before you can sign anyone off.
GT - I'd say leave it alone. I have enought trouble getting even a minimal GT together in our state to run a mission. We need to have at least a minimal qualification level that will allow folks to go into the field supervised for a 3-4 hour line search etc. without requiring several hundred dollars worth of equipment and the ability to eat snakes for several days. The GT3 fit's that bill pretty well.
I seem to remember the current GTM 1, 2, 3 classifications to have been put in place to bring CAP SAR in line with NASAR. I'd leave it alone.
Any commander or trainer worth anything isn't going to sign off the commanders approval to train if they are not comfortable that the trainee can take care of themselves in the field for 24 hours if they are separated. Unless the environment is very controlled.
Quote from: Al Sayre on January 30, 2009, 01:34:56 AM
SET is on the NB agenda. Something like 1 yr experience in a qualification and SQ/CC' s permission before you can sign anyone off.
GT - I'd say leave it alone. I have en ought trouble getting even a minimal GT together in our state to run a mission. We need to have at least a minimal qualification level that will allow folks to go into the field supervised for a 3-4 hour line search etc. without requiring several hundred dollars worth of equipment and the ability to eat snakes for several days. The GT3 fit's that bill pretty well.
I agree. Additionally, as a GBD, the classifications allow me to mix and/or match the ground team assignments to the teams ability. A team made up mostly of GTM3's can do ramp checks and close to the vehicle urban and rural searches, while GTM1/2's can do the remote stuff.
I agree with going back to just having GTMs and GTLs, but non-concur with the trainee only qualification. Agree with putting all the leader tasks in GTL, have a prelim training simlar to what we have now with GTM3 prelim, but have the balance of the tasks to accomplish before becoming fully qualified. Yes, this would make it take longer to get fully qualified, but at least everyone would know what a qualified GTM is. You would know that if you've got 5 qualified GTMS they all know everything they need to know as opposed to having 2 qualified GTM3s that now a few things, 2 GTM2s that know af few other things, etc. Qualified would just mean qualified instead of only partly qualified.
The current system that divides them into 3 levels based solely on how much equipment they have is not very sensible and not useful in practice. Plus, it makes it difficult to train people since tasks relating to the same skill are split up into 3 different levels (for example, map/navigation tasks are found in all three quals so you can't really do a comprehensive navigation class at one time.
Quote from: lordmonar on January 29, 2009, 11:20:38 PM
I've got one....it is just a rough idea right now...but I will start to flesh it out and do a white paper on it.
Ground team qualifications.
Instead of the 4-5 levels we have now (GTM3, 2, 1, GTL, and GBD)...I propose we change it to just 3 levels.
Ground Team Trainee (GTT)
Groud Team Member (GTM)
Ground Team Leader (GTL)
Ground Branch Director (GBD)
Here is my basic idea.
The GTT would be just that a trainee. It will consist of all the "classroom"/lecutre tasks and more map reading and performance tasks that are currently stuck in the GTM 2 and GTM 1 areas. It will still require two "sorties" but these cannot be part of a SAREX or real SAR sortie. They will be field exercises in a controlled enviornment designed test their field surivival skills.
The purpose of the GTT is so when a person is GTT qualified we know that they can take care of them selves in they get seperated in the field. A GTT qualified individual CAN go on a SARES or real SAR as a GTM trainee....but a GTT trainee cannot.
GTM would be the remaining tasks for GTM1 and 2 but we will remove all of the "leader" tasks.
GTL will be only the leader tasks currently in the GTL SQTR....you must be a fully qualified GTM before you can go for GTL (i.e. you can't jump straight from GTT to GTL).
GBD will be more or less the same as it is now.
The GT badge will only be awarded for GTMs.
As this applies to NESA we could make GTT a requirement before attending the basic course. The GTL course can focuse more on small team leadership and teaching instead of basic skill building. The GTM Advance course can be a repeat for the basic course with a focus of sharpening up the GT skills (i.e. more of the same but with stricter standards).
On a seperate issue....SETs qualification. I would make this a SQTR sepcialty that actually reuired the individual to do live training and course development under the supervision of a mentor prior to being qualified.
I would also like to establish an Instructor qualification is the various specialty areas. Being a GT instructor does not automatically mean that you are qualified to be a Scanner Insutructor.
As I said I will work on more specific details over the next few weeks.
I like everything here, except for the GTT part. I'm just not sure how well that would work. But I especially like the idea of going back to just one level of GTM.
Quote from: ELTHunter on January 30, 2009, 01:50:51 AM
I agree. Additionally, as a GBD, the classifications allow me to mix and/or match the ground team assignments to the teams ability. A team made up mostly of GTM3's can do ramp checks and close to the vehicle urban and rural searches, while GTM1/2's can do the remote stuff.
Yes the allow you to mix and match. However, if all you have is GTM3 because no one is ever really required to get GTM 2 and 1 (there's no extra bling associated with it) then mix and match really doesn't matter much, now does it.
Here is my concept of the GTT SQTR
Quote
Task Title Notes
GES Prerequisite
ICUT with Ground Team endorsement Comm--Replaces L-0001/L-0002/L-0003
BCUT Comm--Replace with ICUT with ground team endorsement
L-0001 Basic ES radio procedures Comm--Delete....BCUT or new ICUT with GT endorsement
L-0002 Perform radio operations procedures Comm--Delete....BCUT or new ICUT with GT endorsement
L-0003 Employ appropriate radio frequency and repeaters Comm--Delete....BCUT or new ICUT with GT endorsement
O-XXXX Complete basic first aid First Aid--this task may be used in lieu of the SQRT tasks
O-0003 Prevent and treat hot weather injuries First Aid
O-0004 Prevent and treat cold weather injuries First Aid
O-0101 Identify natural hazards Survival
O-0102 Prevent and Treat Fatigue First Aid
O-0902 Exercise Universal Precautions First Aid
Conduct Actions to stop bleeding First Aid
Bandage a wound First Aid
Identify a medical emergency First Aid
Perform rescue breaths First Aid
Perform CPR First Aid
O-0502 Participate in a litter carry First Aid
Prevent and treat bites and stings First Aid
Prevent and treat strains, sprang and breaks First Aid
Conduct Immediate Actions (Check/Call/Care) First Aid
Identify and treat shock First Aid
O-0103 Conduct field sanitation Survival
O-0104 Set up shelter Survival
O-0407 Conduct attraction techniques Survival
O-0601 Conduct actions if lost Survival
O-0605 Extinguish a small fire Survival
O-0702 Use a signal mirror Survival
Build a small fire Survival
conduct action to find and use safe drinking water Survival
O-0201 Use a compass Map
O-0209 Identify major terrain features on a map Map
O-0210 Identify topographical symbols on a map Map
O-0211 Determine elevation on a map Map
O-0212 Measure distance on a map Map
O-0213 Convert between map and compass azimuths Map
O-0214 Determine and plot an azimuth on a map Map
O-0215 Determine azimuths on a map using two points Map
O-0216 Orient a map to the ground using terrain association Map
O-0217 Orient a map to north using a compass Map
O-0218 Locate own position on a map using terrain association Map
O-0001 Prepare Individual Equipment Search
O-0002 Conduct Individual Refit Search
O-0403 employ search techniques while on foot Search
O-0404 move as part of a search line Search
O-0405 Communicate to other members of a search line Search
O-0406 Use whistle signals search
Be familiar with ground team briefings Search
ICS-200 ICS
My idea of having the GTT SQRT completed before being able to go to the field is two fold.
One it will ensure that the individual is capable of taking care of himself should anything go wrong. Right now a GTM3 trainee does not need to know any first aid, how to find shelter, water or fire.
You can see that I have broken it down into 5 basic areas.
Comm, First Aid, Survival, Search and Maps.
This allows you to teach the skills in intelligent blocks. It also allows GTM trainees to help out be part of the training as their training will align with the GTT training in a lot of ways.
Will this increase the time it take you to get people out into the field? Yes it will. But the GTT SQRT will not require the two mission numbers....just a one or two day out door training session.
I also intend to use the NESA slides and the task manuals/guides to develop a CBT and on line test that will allow us to speed up the training by eliminating as much "classroom" time as we can.
Also not that the First Aid training can be done organically or it can be done via an outside source. This training material will have to be developed (I am working on it).
Also when the ICUT training comes on line all the L-000x comm tasks can be eliminated.
Here is the GTM SQRT
Quote
L-0101 Inspect a vehicle Search
O-0005 Inspect team members Search
O-0006 Inspect team equipment Search
O-0301 Determine distress beacon bearing Search
O-0302 Locate distress beacon Search
O-0303 Deactivate a distress beacon Search
O-0304 Triangulate a distress beacon Search
O-0401 Work with canine search teams Search
O-0408 Identify aircraft search clues Search
O-0409 Identify missing person search clues Search
O-0410 Mark a route or search boundary Search
O-0411 Conduct individual action on locating a clue Search
O-0412 Condcut individual actions on "find" Search
O-0413 Participate in a hasty search Search
O-0420 Perform an airfield search (Ramp check) Search
O-0703 Employ ground to air signals Search
O-0803 Supervise a site surveillance shift Search
O-1002 Establish a helicoper landing zone Search
P-0101 Keep a team log Search
Identify missing vehicle search clues Search
O-0202 Measure distance with pace count Map
O-0203 Navigate past and obsacle Map
O-0204 Locate point on map using latitude and lognitude Map
O-0205 locate a point on a map using the CAP grid system Map
o-0220 move from point to point in a vehicle using a map Map
Locate a point a map using the cell system Map
Locate a point on a map using the UTM system Map
Identify major features on an aeronautical chart Map
Cross check location between road map, topo map and aeronautical chart Map
Identify the major differences between topo, road maps and aeronautical charts Map
And the GTL
Quote
O-0007 Direct team re-fit after sortie
O-0416 Plan Search Line Operations
O-0417 Organise a search line
O-0418 Control a search line
O-0419 Plan and organize a hazty search
O-0421 Direct team actions on locating a clue
O-0422 Direct team action on "find"
O-0802 Plan and organize site surveillance
O-0804 Sign over a site
O-1001 Direct Team actions a meeting piont
O-1101 Conduct witness interview
P-0201 Sign in team at mission
P-0202 Plan and Brief Sortie
P-0203 Plan and conduct rehearsals
P-0204 Conduct after action review
ICS-700
You will notice that I have created a lot of new tasks.
So here are your three levels.
A fully qualified GTT must be under a GTM or GTL depending on the mission (Ramp Check, Ubran DF, Hasty Search, Full Bore Search).
GTM's are fully qualifed and can go on any search without a GTL except for a full bore search.
I am thinking of adding some the GBD tasks to the GTL so they can act sort of an "assitant GBD".
I would just require a CPR certification and first aid card instead of having the different first aid tasks.
By teaching first aid and CPR ourselves...we same time and money.
Of course this course curricumn would have to be developed (I'm working on it).
My suggestions for 60-3 revision:
Item 1
1.28(d) requirement for written permission to do specialized operations. We need to change "urban search and rescue" to confined space operations as I assume that the intent of "Urban SAR" when this was written was doing things like crawling around inside of collapsed buildings. However, this is very confusing as since it isn't defined in the regulation it can be seen as preventing people from doing lost person searches in urban areas since that can be logically considered urban SAR.
Item 2
Ground operations during disaster situations are not really addressed well at all in 60-3 in terms of the concept of operations. I am thinking in particular of things such as working at shelters, food distribution, etc. Do you need to be a ground team member for that?
Item 3
1.20(c): I would like to see more explanation of the concept of operations for crash site security and crowd control operations. I know there are GT tasks related to crash sites but I'm not aware of any CAP regulation addressing crowd control. Most often this seems to be done in non-emergency situations, but as it is mentioned in 60-3 it seems as if CAP anticipates crowd control taskings in emergencies.
Item 4:
1.21(a) Legal restrictions. How about some clarification on that topic that is often discussed here -- whether CAP or the AF will deny insurance benefits or liability protection to CAP members not wearing the proper uniform on an Air Force Assigned or CAP corporate mission.
Item 5
1.21(f). first aid on missions. How about a more definitive statement here (see other threads) on whether CAP members are only authorized to perform basic first aid (however that is defined) on victims no matter the qualification of the CAP member OR whether a CAP member can give any aid they are qualified to perform. For example, if there is a CAP member that is an ER specialist that can use those ultra-specialized medical skills to a victim if necessary and whether CAP would cover him if he made a mistake. If I know that under no circumstances will CAP back me up if I use First Responder skills on a CAP mission, I won't bother to maintain the qualification.
Item 6
Attachment 4 Sortie Equivalency Chart.
I strongly disagree with giving Mission Pilots credit for a Scanner sortie when they actually flew it as mission pilot. There is absolutely no overlap between the duties of the Mission Pilot and the Scanner (except for being on the lookout for safety issues of one type or another). Similarly Transport Mission Pilots should not be given sortie credit as a Scanner.
Item 7
2.2(a)(2). Mission check pilots should have to complete Skills Evaluator Training rather than being exempt. Its not that much to ask that they meet the same standards as any other evaluator.
Item 8
Renewal of Specialty Qualifications (2.4.b.3). I do not believe that a Form 91 check ride should count for recertification for ALL aircrew positions. While I can live with a check ride counting for an observer recertification since there is a lot of overlap with mission pilot, the duties of the scanner don't overlap at all with Mission Pilots and if they want to retain that qualification they need to do a ride in that position.
Item 9
We need to consider starting to match our SAR posiition titles with those used in the NIMS program (Wilderness Search Technician, etc.) as well as implementing physical fitness standards. I'm not sure if they have been finalized yet so it may be a bit pre-mature, but it needs to be discussed. Specifically in regards to the fitness standards we need to know whether CAP would be considered the agency having jurisdiction over our members in this regards or whether this will be a state-by-state thing.
At a minimum we need to stick a section on physical fitness in 60-3 to at least start prepearing members for this, especially ground team members.
USAR and confined space are two differant animals. You do not want a CAP con-space rescue team. USAR at its closest to conspace may involve the search and rescue from void spaces within a collapsed structure; Con space typiclaly relates to rescue from a permited limited access locations, ie pipes, strage tanks, grain silos etc etc. There need not be any "disaster" involved in the need for rescue.
I'd leave that one alone.
mk
Thanks for the clarification, but that doesn't solve the problem relating to the fact that the term isn't properly defined in this regulation and can easily be interpreted to restrict CAP participation in standard SAR searches that happen to take place in urban areas.
Any revision to 60-3 and/or GT requirements without complying with NIMS (ICS) typing would further marginalize our organization in the field of emergency response. With reference to presidential homeland security directives, it might even be unlawful. The bottom line is that we need to learn to work with others, and speak the common language.
-S
Quote...without complying with NIMS (ICS) typing...With reference to presidential homeland security directives, it might even be unlawful.
Not at the federal level. There is no federal law requiring NIMS compliance by anyone, including federal agencies. The carrot or stick, depending on one's perspective, is that non-federal organizations that aren't NIMS compliant aren't eligible for federal preparedness grants. At some time in the future, non-compliant organizations most likely won't be allowed to respond to federally managed incidents.
But the point that CAP shouldn't ignore FEMA typing and credentialing is valid. Unfortunately, the one draft of National's plan to incorporate these and other ICS documents that I saw went way off scale high. My response was "you've gotta to be kidding me." I haven't seen anything since, because "they" were looking for more constructive agreement.
The other issue is that the FEMA resource and credentialing documents are being revised and there are substantial changes from the current documents. I received a letter from FEMA last week stating that the revisions will be posted for public comment in the "near future." Given that they're a year late already, and the non-public reviewers have yet to receive any feedback, who knows when they'll really be out.
As for the comments about USAR in 60-3, it should just come out. Whether it's USAR in confined spaces or collapsed structures, CAP isn't trained to do any of it, nor should it be. In the draft typing/credentialing documents, "Structure Collapse" replaces "Urban SAR." ESF-9 in the NRF refers to "Structural Collapse (Urban) SAR." However, the law directing the creation of the FEMA USAR teams specifically refers to them as USAR.
CAP can perform uSAR as part of its existing mission so there doesn't need to be any special authorization in 60-3. This is from the draft FEMA docs: "One area of clarification for NIMS SAR Credentialing is that the use of the word 'Urban' with a capital 'U' refers to Urban SAR as defined in the National SAR Plan and Manual (structural collapse, et al). The word 'urban' with a small 'u' refers to the environmental setting such as the urban city as described below."
As for other changes to 60-3, I submitted 9 pages of comments last year when National sent out the draft 60-3 for review.
Mike