New CAPR 39-2 Dec 2012

[Eclipse]

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/u_120403111801.pdf

Of note:

Cadets under 18 may remain married.

Congressional and Legislative Members are now specifically authorized to fly in CAP aircraft.

[ßτε]

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/u_120403111801.pdf

Of note:

Cadets under 18 may remain married.

Congressional and Legislative Members are now specifically authorized to fly in CAP aircraft.

You are over 6 years late for the announcement. (The document posted is not the current one but from 2006.)

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R039_002_A74FDA9552C2D.pdf

[SarDragon]

"(2) When a member transfers, the transferring member will be responsible for ensuring his or her records are delivered to the gaining unit."

Change in bold.

[Brad]

"(2) When a member transfers, the transferring member will be responsible for ensuring his or her records are delivered to the gaining unit."

Change in bold.

Glad they got rid of that "hand-carry" specific nonsense. Cross-country headaches.

[Garibaldi]

"(2) When a member transfers, the transferring member will be responsible for ensuring his or her records are delivered to the gaining unit."

Change in bold.

Glad they got rid of that "hand-carry" specific nonsense. Cross-country headaches.

Well heck. I handcarried mine. Easier than waiting on FedEx.

[NorCal21]

"(2) When a member transfers, the transferring member will be responsible for ensuring his or her records are delivered to the gaining unit."

Change in bold.

Glad they got rid of that "hand-carry" specific nonsense. Cross-country headaches.

Well heck. I handcarried mine. Easier than waiting on FedEx.

Heck, I have hand-carried it from day one, and in my current unit I still have my packet here at home. Little less formal. Can't tell you how not one unit I've ever been part of has ever filled out the SM record anyway. Hand-carrying my packet is just a habit from the Marines anyway.

[NorCal21]

Of note:

Cadets under 18 may remain married.

Is this a real problem in CAP?

[Garibaldi]

Of note:

Cadets under 18 may remain married.

Is this a real problem in CAP?

Only in Arkansas and Abalama

[Pylon]

I wonder why they didn't update CAPR 39-2, Section 1-15 regarding plastic membership cards and the picture ID cards?  It would seem it would be prudent to outline the terminology between "Membership Card" and "Picture Membership Card" (and its limitations, aka: not an identification card). 


It would seem we could have eliminated the CAPF 19 Photo ID card, too. We have picture membership cards from NHQ now.  Why do we still have CAPF 19's as hold-overs from the days when a paper ID with a pasted-on, cut-out photograph actually passed for something other than an elementary school arts-n-crafts project?


Section 2-2, c. is just confusing the way they wrote it.  I get the intent was to eliminate the provision that applicants must not be married to be eligible for cadet membership.  But the way they wrote that change now seems to imply that the applicant for cadet membership must be single or married, and other statuses  (widowed or divorced) are, by inference, ineligible.  Not that I imagine this is a big deal or likely to be common, but why can't we learn to be clear with our regulatory writing? 


Section 2-2, d. more language confusion.  But they say they don't consider "Basic Military Training" for the Reserves and Guard to be extended active duty.  Okay.  Except that only one branch calls their entry training "Basic Military Training" and every branch has to go on to additional active duty training for their MOS or other schools.  The DOD term, "Initial Active Duty for Training" or IADT would encompass both basic training/recruit training and follow-on schools and apply to all branches without ambiguity.  Again, let's get our terminology right if we're going to revise and update regs.


Section 2-4(b)(3): Why are we still forwarding copies of cadet membership applications to Wings (in some Wings) apparently?  I cannot think of one purpose this serves.  The Wing has access to all the information it could possibly need in CAPWATCH/E-Services.  Wing doesn't maintain personnel files for cadets throughout the Wing, therefore why would they want/need/retain a copy of their membership application?   For Wings that do this, what do they even do with these once they receive them?  (Same questions with regards to senior members and Section 3-5(b)(3)).


Section 2-5: I would like to see a process included here explaining what to do with cadets who join the Armed Forces but do not submit a CAPF 12 and fingerprint card.  Do they stay cadets?  Can they become senior members?  Do they go into membership limbo?  Are they terminated?  The section requires their compliance, but we all know cadets who've gone off to the military and doing some paperwork for CAP is the last thing on their minds.  Especially since once they depart, they can be gone for 6-12 months in IADT, so that's a lot of time to not know what their proper membership status ought to be.  It'd be nice to standardize, explain, and detail the procedure for handling those cadets.  I know I've had those cases.


Section 5-1(h) has always been a curiosity for me.  We authorize Cadet Sponsor Members to wear any Corporate Style Uniform, and then mention a distinctive nametag.  We do not ever outline how any of those uniforms are supposed to be worn in CAPM 39-1 or anywhere else.  So, if the CSM is authorized to wear the Distinctive "Blue BDUs" do they wear name tapes and a CAP tape?  Or no tapes and just pin on a plastic CSM nametag?   What about the blue flight suit?   Are they required to wear the nametag if not in uniform?  What does this CSM nametag even look like (I've never seen one, has anybody else?).  Where is it worn on civilian attire?  Can a lady in a tank top pin it to her spaghetti straps?  Can a guy pin it on his ripped-up cargo shorts?  How about some guidance here.  It seems like a gaping hole to me that's never been clarified.


Thoughts?

[ßτε]

I wonder why they didn't update CAPR 39-2, Section 1-15 regarding plastic membership cards and the picture ID cards?  It would seem it would be prudent to outline the terminology between "Membership Card" and "Picture Membership Card" (and its limitations, aka: not an identification card). 


It would seem we could have eliminated the CAPF 19 Photo ID card, too. We have picture membership cards from NHQ now.  Why do we still have CAPF 19's as hold-overs from the days when a paper ID with a pasted-on, cut-out photograph actually passed for something other than an elementary school arts-n-crafts project?

Are you looking at the old document (posted by Eclipse)? The current document has no reference to the CAPF 19 in section 1-15.

[SarDragon]

Why is the plastic card with a picture on it not an ID card? It has your name, picture, and CAPID on it.

A military ID has parallel information, as does a driver's license.

[FW]

A CAP membership card identifies an individual as a member of CAP.  That's about it.  It is not used for anything else that would require identification as a voter, citizen, airline passenger, etc.  It is not "government issued".

It is interesting that CSMs are allowed to wear corporate distinctive uniforms.  The distinctive name tag is bought when first becoming one.  It is an extra $10 fee tagged to the initial application ($20 dollar membership fee and $10 for the name tag).  This part of the regulation is new.

[ßτε]

A CAP membership card identifies an individual as a member of CAP.  That's about it.  It is not used for anything else that would require identification as a voter, citizen, airline passenger, etc.  It is not "government issued".

It is interesting that CSMs are allowed to wear corporate distinctive uniforms.  The distinctive name tag is bought when first becoming one.  It is an extra $10 fee tagged to the initial application ($20 dollar membership fee and $10 for the name tag).  This part of the regulation is new.

This part of the regulation is not new. It has been there since at least 2006.

[FW]

  This part of the regulation is new.

This part of the regulation is not new. It has been there since at least 2006.

You're correct.. That's what I get for posting before my first cup of coffee...

[a2capt]

Hmm... "Fred never posts before his first cup of coffee .."

[SarDragon]

A CAP membership card identifies an individual as a member of CAP.  That's about it.  It is not used for anything else that would require identification as a voter, citizen, airline passenger, etc.  It is not "government issued".

I think you're being too strict with your definition. An ID doesn't need to be "government issued" to be an ID. Many companies issue internal IDs for various reasons, usually access to different areas, computers, etc. It's still an ID - it as has your name, picture, and some sort of unique identifying number on it.