How to appeal an SUI Discrepancy

[dbbarry]

We have received (or will within the next week) a discrepancy for having more than the minimum amount of detail in our Squadron File Plan.  As I read CAPR 10-2, there is nothing that says that the example is not to be exceeded.  I wish to appeal the discrepancy before I ask my staff to deconstruct what I believe is a document that is compliant and goes above and beyond the minimum (and that I found to be very helpful in SUI prep).

How do I appeal the discrepancy at the next level above the Inspector?  I tried googling and I tried searching CAP, but came up dry.

Regards,
Dave Barry, Sq. CC

[Eclipse]

How do I appeal the discrepancy at the next level above the Inspector? 

You don't "appeal" a discrepancy, you respond.  You should have been briefed on, and the SUI should contain, the process
for responding to discrepancies (including the required timelines).

SUI responses are now tracked in eServices. You respond, sometimes provide substantiation,
the inspector either responds or closes the discrepancy.  Lack of timely response is what usually gets people into trouble.

The ultimate arbiter is the Wing CC.  The inspectors are fact-finders with no authority.  At the point an impasse is reached,
the Wing CC has to get involved.

An appropriate response would be something to the effect of:

"Unit's file plan is current and correct as per CAPR 10-2.  Please cite regulation or policy which indicates the
prescription and detail level allowed."

With that said...

There is no spoon, FIMO.

If your file plan is more then a single page, you're doing it wrong.

There is no spoon, FIMO.

For curiosity's sake, what level of "extra" are you including, and what were you told to correct?

[Holding Pattern]

How do I appeal the discrepancy at the next level above the Inspector? 

You don't "appeal" a discrepancy, you respond.  You should have been briefed on, and the SUI should contain, the process
for responding to discrepancies (including the required timelines).

SUI responses are now tracked in eServices. You respond, sometimes provide substantiation,
the inspector either responds or closes the discrepancy.  Lack of timely response is what usually gets people into trouble.

The ultimate arbiter is the Wing CC.  The inspectors are fact-finders with no authority.  At the point an impasse is reached,
the Wing CC has to get involved.

An appropriate response would be something to the effect of:

"Unit's file plan is current and correct as per CAPR 10-2.  Please cite regulation or policy which indicates the
prescription and detail level allowed."

With that said...

There is no spoon, FIMO.

If your file plan is more then a single page, you're doing it wrong.

There is no spoon, FIMO.

What is FIMO?

For curiosity's sake, what level of "extra" are you including, and what were you told to correct?

Isn't that technically FOUO?

[Eclipse]

What is FIMO?

Forget I Move On

For curiosity's sake, what level of "extra" are you including, and what were you told to correct?

Isn't that technically FOUO?

No.  There's nothing in the File Plan that is FOUO, confidential, or even "interesting".  The file plan simply
indicates where file types are stored maintained.  I'm just curious what "extra" there's even the ability
to include considering the parameters.

The point of a file plan is just "hit by a bus" continuity - "Where's the lease for the building?" etc.
It's olde school from the disconnected days of units doing everything on their own, including handling money
and contracts, etc.

Considering how many SUIs get a D for the File Plan, and how simple they are to create and maintain,
they aren't worth hanging your hat on or making a point about even a little.

Change / fix it, upload a copy, close the D.  FIMO

Here's what mine looks like:


10-2 has examples, but not prescriptions, any format may be used, unless your wing has published a
standard, which if they are smart, they have.

[Brad]

Second to what Eclipse said, the only bit about SUIs where FUOU comes in is the report itself and correspondence related to it about what issues were identified, specifically what discrepancies exist, etc. This would only be information shared among the IG levels involved and the Command levels involved (Wing/CC, Squadron/CC).

CAPR 123-3 para 9b.:

b. Disclaimer. All inspections and reports, and associated correspondence containing discrepancy reporting, will include the following statement: "This is a PRIVILEGED DOCUMENT that cannot be released in whole or part to persons or agencies outside the Civil Air Patrol or USAF, nor can it be republished in whole or part in any publication not containing this statement, including the Civil Air Patrol magazines and general use pamphlets, without the express approval of the National Commander of the Civil Air Patrol and Commander of CAP-USAF." FOR OFFICIAL CAP USE ONLY

Personal practice, I stick it on the bottom of emails when corresponding with Wing/IG ref an SUI I was a team member on, but your mileage may vary.

[CAP9907]

Your SUI report hasn't even been published yet. Wait and see what the actual report says, SUI compliance is black and white as are the discrepancies. I'd be curious to see how it works out.

[Brad]

Looking through the SUI worksheet we see this:

Is there a formal file plan established IAW CAP regulations?...Unit will provide a copy of formal file plan documentation that
includes where records are located (e.g., File drawer C-H, vehicle glove box, computer file My Computer\Document\CAP\Squadron
5\Supplements, etc.)......(A-Discrepancy): [xx] (Question 4) Unit does not have a formal file plan IAW CAPR 10-2 para 2.

And looking at the SUI report blank itself all there is is:

4 Is there a formal file plan established IAW CAP regulations?

Ok then, so let's look at CAPR 10-2 para. 2:

2. File Plan. (See Figure 1.)
a. On white 8½" x 11" paper, typed or printed, and filed in front of current files.
b. Offices maintaining their own file plan will forward an information copy to their unit
administrative officer.

Ok so finally we get to the meat and potatoes, Figure 1. Figure 1 is just an example though, it even says that in the title, and it stands to reason that you may not have all of those entries such as fund raisers or such, or you may have them in a different order, or you may need more entries to describe your particular filing situation. The point is that as long as it basically meets the example given, which is basically a table of contents for the files, then to be honest I am struggling to see as to why you would get a discrepancy. If your file plan reasonably meets the example given, then I as an SUI team member would not ding you on that (Disclaimer: I'm not an admin SME, I'm a comm SME.)

So yes, wait for the official report to come out and see what you actually get. I'd be really surprised if it escalated past the level of Area of Concern, or even to that point at all.

[Eclipse]

+1

The only real issues are:

1 - No file plan.

2 - File Plan exists but hasn't been updated or doesn't match the cabinets.

3 - File plan exists but files look like this:

[Fubar]

Contact your IG. It sounds like you might have an inspector who doesn't quite understand the question.

Hey, we're all volunteers, even the inspectors. Sounds like an easy fix.