Notice on CAPM 39-1 comments

[arajca]

Since the previous discussion on the draft CAPM 39-1 is locked, here is an email I (and many others) received:

I want to thank you for the time and effort you put into commenting on the recent draft of CAP Manual 39-1, The CAP Uniform Manual. Hundreds of CAP members participated in the online feedback process, and, in the end, more than 1,250 individual comments and suggestions were received.

The National Uniform Committee has gone through all of this feedback. Comments on grammar, punctuation and formatting were evaluated and changes are being made to the draft based on these. Additionally, following comments on images in the manual, virtually every photo and graphic has been replaced with nearly 200 new illustrations.

Finally, many members provided specific feedback on policies in the manual. With more than 600 policy recommendations, it is not possible to provide a specific response for each of these. However, the National Uniform Committee has categorized these into about 20 different suggestions and is providing me with final recommendations.

Thank you, again, for your participation in the feedback process. Your involvement, and the involvement of everyone that participated, has made this a better product for all of Civil Air Patrol.
CHARLES L. CARR, Jr.
Maj Gen, CAP
National Commander

With that much input, it'll be interesting to see what changes in the final version.

[mdickinson]

Good for them for soliciting input, and good for Maj Gen Carr for acknowledging it and thanking those who helped out.

I appreciated his including the stats on comments received - it shows that they were sorted, tabulated, and enumerated. Even though we may each have made some suggestions that were discarded, it shows that the request for comment was not a black hole, and that each comment was read and probably considered.

Looking forward to a new and improved manual!

[NIN]

Looking forward to a new and improved manual!

We can hope!

[abdsp51]

Anyone have any idea when this will be kicked out?

[Panache]

I read May somewhere.  Not sure where, but May was definitely mentioned.

[abdsp51]

Be nice.  As much as I am not a fan of the polo a pair of cargo pants would me much more comfortable.

[Panache]

Be nice.  As much as I am not a fan of the polo a pair of cargo pants would me much more comfortable.

You know you can wear cargo pants with the polo right now, right?  There's nothing in the current 39-1 which prohibits it.

[a2capt]

But is there something that allows it in that exact detail, or is this yet another one of those ambiguous based interpretations.

There's a lot of sections that don't say the same thing, leaving it to be implied based on the previous section that mentioned it.

[abdsp51]

I would rather wait until the new 39-1 comes out before wearing them as they are specifically mentioned in writing.

[Panache]

"Commercial slacks/trousers in medium gray color, full cut, straight hanging, with or without pleats, with or with
out cuffs. Cotton/twill weave trousers are authorized (no jeans). "

That being said, I've gray cargo pants being worn with the polo... well, since forever, it seems, and it's never been an issue with anybody.  Not once.

YMMV, of course.

[SunDog]

Polo, cargoes, and coach's shoes. . .stylish, comfortable, and reuasble for yard work or grocery shopping! Add a baseball cap, sun glasses, and take a nap under the wing while Air Branch gets their act. . .gets organized.

Any reason we can't lose the 39-1 and just call it the Uniform Manual? Same-same for the other bazillion manuals, pamphlets, guides, doctrines, SOPs, etc,?

[Panache]

Add a baseball cap, sun glasses, and take a nap under the wing while Air Branch gets their act. . .gets organized.

Well, good news.  The baseball cap is specifically authorized for wear with the polos and G/Ws!   

[Grumpy]

Be nice.  As much as I am not a fan of the polo a pair of cargo pants would me much more comfortable.

You know you can wear cargo pants with the polo right now, right?  There's nothing in the current 39-1 which prohibits it.

There's nothing in the Air Force AFI's or 39-1 that prohibit coon skin caps either but I seriously doubt we can wear them.

[SunDog]

Dodgers, or Mets? 

Permission will finally triumph over forgiveness, then!

[Panache]

There's nothing in the Air Force AFI's or 39-1 that prohibit coon skin caps either but I seriously doubt we can wear them.

Does anybody from KYWG want to comment on this?

[NIN]

I read May somewhere.  Not sure where, but May was definitely mentioned.

The target is, indeed, May.

[Storm Chaser]

Will we get to see a second draft before May?

[NIN]

Will we get to see a second draft before May?

Doubtful.  I believe the opportunity for member comment on this particular 39-1 is past.

[Angus]

Will we get to see a second draft before May?

Doubtful.  I believe the opportunity for member comment on this particular 39-1 is past.

I wouldn't think we'd get a second comment period.  If we kept on having comment period, redraft and new comment period we'd be standing stagnant forever in the cycle.  "It's coming once we finally stop complaining about every little detail"

[NIN]

I wouldn't think we'd get a second comment period.  If we kept on having comment period, redraft and new comment period we'd be standing stagnant forever in the cycle.  "It's coming once we finally stop complaining about every little detail"

Yeah, that was kind of my point:  There is certainly a need/opportunity for member comment.  I don't believe there is a need for multiple rounds of it, especially as it will *definitely* impact the ability of NHQ to get this put to bed and published.

The comment period for the last one closed at the end of January. The approval for changes that stemmed from that comment period was just made.   So figure "2 months" is a good rule of thumb for "turnaround"