CAP Cadet BDU Question

[applehack3r]

I have two patches that i don't have any clothes to put them on.. IMO they are related to CAP.. My question is are they allowed for placement upon the BDU Uniform? I have the NRA Marksman Rocker (i wear the badge on my blues) and my county CERT Patch.. are these allowed to be placed on the blues uniform?

[SarDragon]

No. If it's not in the CAPM 39-1, it's not allowed. Also, until the new version is released, the current NRA badge is not authorized, since the program associated with the badge in the reg no longer exists.

Also, your Q is confusing, since you refer to BDUs in the first part, and blues in the second.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Troll much?

[Eclipse]

^ Seriously.

[a2capt]

There are -a lot- of cadets with that NRA badge.

I'm sure that even if was earned on the program that was mentioned, that ended so long ago that it's not possible for there to be any more cadets that have not aged out.

When I point it out, I'm usually scoffed at. OTOH, if it's an activity I have control over, they won't have it on. That has not happened yet.

[Shawn W.]

No. If it's not in the CAPM 39-1, it's not allowed. Also, until the new version is released, the current NRA badge is not authorized, since the program associated with the badge in the reg no longer exists.

According to knowledge Base, that's not entierly true.. And I am only quoting what was posted from knowledge base here.

Wear of the NRA marksmanship badge

Published 02/04/2013 06:41 AM   |    Updated 08/06/2013 08:34 AM   |    Answer ID: 2407
Can I wear I still earn and wear the NRA marksmanship badge?

While we realize the Junior NRA badge referenced in the uniform manual is now obsolete, the intent of authorizing the wear of the badge was to recognize some type of standardized marksmanship training for cadets. An NRA badge is still authorized for wear by CAP cadets today--it's just not a junior badge now.

[abdsp51]

Wear of the NRA marksmanship badge

Published 02/04/2013 06:41 AM   |    Updated 08/06/2013 08:34 AM   |    Answer ID: 2407
Can I wear I still earn and wear the NRA marksmanship badge?

While we realize the Junior NRA badge referenced in the uniform manual is now obsolete, the intent of authorizing the wear of the badge was to recognize some type of standardized marksmanship training for cadets. An NRA badge is still authorized for wear by CAP cadets today--it's just not a junior badge now.

Knowledgebase is not regulatory at all.  If the badge is not listed in 39-1 it can not be worn. 

[Eclipse]

+1 - Authoritative answers don't include the term "some sort".

[a2capt]

"some type", furthermore the use of "was" in that reply is also ambiguous as that can be taken in the context of "no longer" as well.

If the intent -is- to recognize marksmanship training, then how hard would it have been for them to simply update that with an ICL, to include the currently offered NRA marksmanship program?

I'm aware of several submissions through the CoC to clear this up, which have neither been replied to, or obviously, put into play. 

With the new "update whenever and just publish" method, you'd think it would have just been changed?

[LSThiker]

I'm aware of several submissions through the CoC to clear this up, which have neither been replied to, or obviously, put into play. 

With the new "update whenever and just publish" method, you'd think it would have just been changed?

Not saying whether you are correct or not, but I would not use this logic to justify your stance.  For one, how many changes or suggestions are sent up the CoC and are never acted on or put into play?  I believe in the thread with the CAPM 39-1 draft, someone had made comments about the process for recommending changes to the uniform was terrible.  As with many recommendations regarding uniforms, I am sure a lot of good suggestions, and correct suggestions, have been stopped not because of disagreement but simply due to the lack of feeling it is an important topic.  This would be like someone saying "well the national commander saw that and did not say anything, therefore it must be okay".

Second, just because they have not published an ICL does not mean much either.  Not knowing the entire politics at NHQ, but if the NHQ staff believe the intent was clear in the CAPM 39-1, they may not see any need to publish an ICL.  Further, they may have seen using the CAP Knowledgebase as a method to clear things up without the need to publish an ICL.   

[abdsp51]

I'm aware of several submissions through the CoC to clear this up, which have neither been replied to, or obviously, put into play. 

With the new "update whenever and just publish" method, you'd think it would have just been changed?

Not saying whether you are correct or not, but I would not use this logic to justify your stance.  For one, how many changes or suggestions are sent up the CoC and are never acted on or put into play?  I believe in the thread with the CAPM 39-1 draft, someone had made comments about the process for recommending changes to the uniform was terrible.  As with many recommendations regarding uniforms, I am sure a lot of good suggestions, and correct suggestions, have been stopped not because of disagreement but simply due to the lack of feeling it is an important topic.  This would be like someone saying "well the national commander saw that and did not say anything, therefore it must be okay".

Second, just because they have not published an ICL does not mean much either.  Not knowing the entire politics at NHQ, but if the NHQ staff believe the intent was clear in the CAPM 39-1, they may not see any need to publish an ICL.  Further, they may have seen using the CAP Knowledgebase as a method to clear things up without the need to publish an ICL.

Irregardless of intent, politics, thoughts, feelings etc.  39-1 states clearly what badges may or may not be worn.  The current NRA badge is not authorized and therefore without a MFR or ICL on it it will continue to be unauthorized.  Knowledgebase is not regulatory in any aspect and is not the proper channel for basing wear of an item.  The draft 39-1 has the newer program in it and those desiring to wear the badge should wait for it to be published.

[LSThiker]

Irregardless of intent, politics, thoughts, feelings etc.  39-1 states clearly what badges may or may not be worn.  The current NRA badge is not authorized and therefore without a MFR or ICL on it it will continue to be unauthorized.  Knowledgebase is not regulatory in any aspect and is not the proper channel for basing wear of an item.  The draft 39-1 has the newer program in it and those desiring to wear the badge should wait for it to be published.

Again, not saying whether the wear of the NRA badge is right or wrong.  Frankly, I really do not care whether or not a cadet wears one or not.  I am merely pointing out that "absence of evidence is not evidence".  The fact that NHQ has not published an ICL is not evidence of anything.  That is all I am saying.

To be honest, I find it disturbing that the "Uniforms & Awards" area has more posts than the "ES/Operations", "Cadet Programs", "Encampments & NCSA", and "Aerospace Education" combined.

[abdsp51]

Irregardless of intent, politics, thoughts, feelings etc.  39-1 states clearly what badges may or may not be worn.  The current NRA badge is not authorized and therefore without a MFR or ICL on it it will continue to be unauthorized.  Knowledgebase is not regulatory in any aspect and is not the proper channel for basing wear of an item.  The draft 39-1 has the newer program in it and those desiring to wear the badge should wait for it to be published.

Again, not saying whether the wear of the NRA badge is right or wrong.  Frankly, I really do not care whether or not a cadet wears one or not.  I am merely pointing out that "absence of evidence is not evidence".  The fact that NHQ has not published an ICL is not evidence of anything.  That is all I am saying.

To be honest, I find it disturbing that the "Uniforms & Awards" area has more posts than the "ES/Operations", "Cadet Programs", "Encampments & NCSA", and "Aerospace Education" combined.

The fact that NHQ has not published an ICL shows how much they think on the issue, or maybe because they knew it was going into the new 39-1 so why bother with the ICL.  Either way the cadet's question was answered and using knowledge base which isn't regulatory as a basis to allow wear doesn't fly.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

By the same token, I highly doubt that the NRA award I won back in the '70s in the BSA for shooting .22 rifles, which I wore on my Scout uniform, would be wearable today on any CAP uniform.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Further, they may have seen been FTFY using the CAP Knowledgebase as a method to clear things up without the need to publish an ICL.

Some people see that and assume NHQ uses Knowledgebase as an ICL, others do not because NHQ has not published rules about KB use as an ICL. I see the regs and KB this way. Using regs is like going to the doctor who prescribes medication and treatment. Using KB is like looking for advice on the Internet, who gives you a general advice but does not tell you for sure what medication you should use.

Flyer

[Shawn W.]

Knowledgebase is not regulatory at all.  If the badge is not listed in 39-1 it can not be worn. 

Good point and understood.... but then my question is, If KB is not regulatory, then who gives KB permission to answer questions like these? That authority must come from somewhere

[Luis R. Ramos]

It is not "authority" but it is like someone that keeps getting questions and decides to start answering questions...

Think about this...

CapTalk is not regulatory, CAPTalk has no "authority" from CAP to answer questions in an official manner yet is read many times by personnel who do not go to the regulations/manuals/pamphlets. CAPTalk then is akin or similar to Knowledgebase...

Flyer

[Eclipse]

Good point and understood.... but then my question is, If KB is not regulatory, then who gives KB permission to answer questions like these? That authority must come from somewhere

The questions are forwarded to "Subject Matter Experts" who then are supposed to answer them.  When the answer is
simply a quote of a reg, or a direct response from someone with a given authority, no issue.  The problem comes in when
someone who is considered an SME "interprets" in a way outside their authority.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion on a given subject, but only those in the chain, or the BOG/CSAG, etc., have the actual; authority to "say"
things that aren't found in the text.  Another problem is when an SME has advanced knowledge of an upcoming change, or worse possible change in
a regulation or policy.  They answer using that knowledge, and then the change never happens, or takes years.  A draft is a draft until ratified and
not before.

In this case, the current badge isn't authorized.  Period.  This has been acknowledge in meeting minutes and other venues.

Interestingly, the draft of 39-1 still calls out a specific program by name, which means even after adoption, CAP could find itself
in the same situation if the NRA changes the name.  What it should say is "the currently NHQ-approved NRA rifle program" or something
similar.

Lastly, we're all responding to a drive-by who is never coming back, though after the first few rounds, it was more us just restating the same
things we've all said 20 times before.

Trolled.

[SARDOC]

^^^ I would think that when a member contacts National Headquarters through the the Knowledgebase system.  When members receive an answer, it's typical to see this as tacit NHQ approval IAW CAPM39-1.

When a random NHQ staff member issues an opinion could it be construed using

New or changed uniform items may not be authorized without approval of the National Commander/National Board and/or National Headquarters   

This would seem that National Headquarters is authorized to make changes to the uniform regulations...possibly even though the Knowledgebase system.

I'm just playing the Devil's advocate here because I'm not really sure in that is the way it was intended.

[Eclipse]

This would seem that National Headquarters is authorized to make changes to the uniform regulations...possibly even though the Knowledgebase system.

Simply put, they aren't.