GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-19-2014, 06:49   #1
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
Latest on U.S.A.F. Implementation of LEOSA

http://www.afsfc.af.mil/shared/media...140310-039.pdf

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 07:13   #2
Bill Lumberg
BTF Inventor
 
Bill Lumberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,194
Good stuff.
__________________
Did someone talk to you about your TPS reports?
Bill Lumberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 08:32   #3
crazyasian1
Senior Member
 
crazyasian1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 523
Awww man!! This would be awesome considering I just got orders to the Commie state of Maryland!

I'll admit to not having read the entire law yet, can someone give me a primer on what this would mean for me in MD?
__________________
famous last words: "Check this **** out..."
crazyasian1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 08:44   #4
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
Basically, you have a CCW permit that is subject to the same limits as a resident of the State you are in. The exception is the State can't limit your choice of ammo. Magazine capacity restrictions remain in place.

You can check out the Facebook page here:

https://www.facebook.com/usafsfleosa

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 03-19-2014 at 08:45..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 09:00   #5
Bill Lumberg
BTF Inventor
 
Bill Lumberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,194
It is not a ccw, nor is it subject to the limits for permitholders in the state you are in. In short, it allows state and local law enforcement to carry nationwide on or off duty (federal already could), with very few restrictions (ex. Leosa allows for states/municipalites to decide whether to allow off duty/retired police to carry in their buildings). Allows qualified retired law enforcement to carry in retirement. So, not to detract from happy's excellent thread, but law enforcement carrying off duty/retired under LEOSA are not subject to the restrictions for ccw'ers in a given state. It's a subtle difference, but a big one, depending upon how restrictive a given state's ccw laws are.
__________________
Did someone talk to you about your TPS reports?
Bill Lumberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 09:08   #6
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg View Post
It is not a ccw, nor is it subject to the limits for permitholders in the state you are in. In short, it allows state and local law enforcement to carry nationwide on or off duty (federal already could), with very few restrictions (ex. Leosa allows for states/municipalites to decide whether to allow off duty/retired police to carry in their buildings). Allows qualified retired law enforcement to carry in retirement. So, not to detract from happy's excellent thread, but law enforcement carrying off duty/retired under LEOSA are not subject to the restrictions for ccw'ers in a given state. It's a subtle difference, but a big one, depending upon how restrictive a given state's ccw laws are.
Bill, if you have something that contests the bold part I would sure like to see it. I would like to avoid unnecessary conflict with the active authorities if at all possible, but I don't want to add imaginary limitations to myself or put out misinformation either.

Bills post is correct, mine is in error. Internet first Happyguy admits a mistake!

I am as far from an qualified expert on this as I am a qualified expert on brain surgery so here is an NRA attorney's take on the law:
Quote:
By James M. Baranowski, Esq. NRA-ILA

During a recent presentation on LEOSA at the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association Conference (ILEETA), I addressed the fact that individuals carrying under LEOSA do not qualify for the same exemptions some state permit holders benefit from in terms of carrying concealed firearms in Federal Parks and Gun Free School Zones (GFSZ). The surprised looks and concerns from the audience raised a giant red flag: if the experts out there don't know this, how many others may be unknowingly violating the law?

While LEOSA affords qualified active and retired law enforcement officers the privilege to carry a concealed firearm in all fifty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and all other U.S. possessions (except the Canal Zone), it does contain some restrictions.

Explicitly written into the statute are several areas considered off-limits to those carrying under LEOSA, such as restrictions imposed by private persons or entities on the their property and those imposed on state or local government property, installations, buildings and parks. What is not included in the statute is where problems may arise.

Per 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) an individual is prohibited from possessing or attempting to possess a firearm in a Federal facility, which is broadly defined in the statute to include "a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties".

While the ban on possession in Federal facilities appears to be well understood and recognized by those carrying under LEOSA, the exemptions which allow individuals with a state issued permit to carry concealed firearms in Federal park lands and through GFSZ's are not.

The exemptions for these areas (36 C.F.R. §§ 2.4(e) & (h), 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)) allow for individuals carrying concealed in accordance with the laws of the state in which the federal park or GFSZ is located to carry concealed in them*; however, an individual carrying under LEOSA is carrying under FEDERAL LAW and not in accordance with the laws of the state they are in. What this means is that you are NOT exempted from carrying a concealed firearm in these areas UNLESS you are on official duty or posses a valid and qualifying state issued concealed carry permit.

Don't think this applies to you? Think again. Go check out your local Planning Department's website or take a quick look at San Francisco Planning Department's GFSZ map (www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=2337). Most cities are so laden with GFSZ's that it is virtually impossible to travel anywhere without inadvertently passing through one of them.

So what does this mean for you? While there have been no known prosecutions of individuals violating these laws while carrying under LEOSA (one must assume that professional courtesy and the lack of knowledge on the issue has prevented this) you should always protect yourself by obtaining a state issued concealed carry permit in addition to your LEOSA credentials. Most states have reciprocity laws and agreements which allow for vast recognition of their permits throughout the country and some even allow you to apply as a non-resident.** Bottom line; always be aware of your surroundings, as ignorance is not a defense to the law.

* Federal buildings located on the property are still prohibited places per 18 U.S.C. § 930(a)

** More information about state reciprocity and recognition agreements can be found at www.nraila.org/gun-laws.aspx
And the obligatory FAQ:

Quote:
FAQ on the amendments to the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act

1. Does the agency who qualifies me need to make a record of the make, model, caliber, or serial number of the firearm I qualify with?

No. LEOSA does not require the agency to maintain this information. This is a frequent concern given the statute's use of the term "type of firearm." LEOSA authorizes the carrying of a "concealed firearm" of the same "type" the individual receives certification for. As there is no case law interpreting this wording, the word "type" should be read to conform with the dictionary definition; something distinguishable as a variety. Accordingly, "type" of firearm should be read to mean either long gun or hand gun, which would permit you to carry any type of legal long gun or hand gun based on your qualification and not one particular make, model, or caliber. As an action outside of LEOSA requirements, the creation and maintenance of a database may expose the agency to liability, as discussed below.

2. The agency who qualifies me wants me to shoot their uniformed officer course of fire, rather than an off-duty or back-up course of fire. What does the law require?

The law is not clear, and only requires an individual to meet the active duty standards for qualification. An individual exercising their rights under LEOSA is not provided with the authority to act as a law enforcement officer, and is simply authorized to carry a concealed firearm based on their status. Accordingly, it would be advisable for agencies to use the off-duty or back-up course of fire. Mandating the use of uniformed standards requires an individual to meet standards designed for law enforcement purposes, while an individual carrying a firearm under LEOSA is not acting as a law enforcement officer, as they are either retired, or out of their jurisdiction.

3. Do I have to prove each year that I am still eligible to qualify by submitting to a background check, or is the identification card I was provided at separation sufficient?

No. The identification card is sufficient. As addressed below, some departments are now requiring background checks before issuing identification cards. Such unwarranted overregulation exposes that department to liability. The statute does not require a background check, and when issuing an identification card the agency is only providing certification with regard to one's past employment status; a statement of fact. Any department that requires a background check is creating more than just a statement of one's employment status, which may expose the requesting agency to liability.

4. Does the agency I retired from, or the agency that qualifies me, have any liability or concerns for qualifying me?

No, LEOSA places the liability on the individual; however, many agencies are trying to impose unjustified requirements before issuing identification cards or training certification, such as background checks. Identification cards are simply a statement of fact by the agency that the individual is either an active duty or retired law enforcement officer. Requiring additional information to obtain an identification card makes it something more, and by doing so exposes the agency to liability. The same is true for agencies which perform the firearms qualification certification. Any additional procedures required by the agency other then simply meeting their active duty standards creates a situation where the agency is certifying more then the statute requires, and in some cases, the uniformed standards qualification course/test may be seen as providing training in the use of a firearm in a law enforcement role, which may expose them to liability. Remember, LEOSA is a program for CIVILIANS who used to be cops, or cops out of their jurisdiction. LEOSA should be administered like driver's licenses issued by your state; you are just certifying that a standard was met. Your state does the same with a driver's license, showing you met their standard. If you are in a wreck while driving, your state motor vehicle department isn't liable for your actions because you have their driver's license.

5. The department I retired from will not give me retirement credentials, what can I do?

This is a question we are encountering far too frequently, and regrettably there is no clear guidance that can be provided. LEOSA does not bestow either an explicit right to obtain the required identification or a federal remedy for a state agency's failure to issue one. Such refusal is foolish policy but it is a political issue, not a legal one.

6. I am active duty or retired military/DoD police. Does LEOSA apply to me?

Yes. On January 2nd, 2013 LEOSA was amended to specifically allow for active and "retired" (as defined by LEOSA) military and DoD police and law enforcement officers with UCMJ apprehension authority to qualify for the statute; however, the DoD has not amended its own policy on LEOSA, DODI 5525.12, resulting in an inability for many that are now able to qualify to obtain the requisite photographic identification card. A standard CAC or blue retiree card will not work for LEOSA purposes as the photographic ID must identify the individual as either being actively or having once been employed as a police or law enforcement officer of the agency.

7. I have a Concealed Carry Permit/License issued by my state. I am also active/retired law enforcement. Am I allowed to carry in all states?

No. A state issued concealed carry permit or license is entirely different from the ability to carry a concealed weapon under LEOSA and has no relation to your service as a law enforcement officer. Your state's permit may qualify for reciprocity with other states, but it does not qualify you to carry in all states. Check with the State Police or the State's Attorney General's Office before carrying a concealed firearm in any state exercising reciprocity with the state of your permit/license, as laws change frequently and a state which previously recognized your permit may have changed its law.

8. I left my agency after serving 11 years and did not retire. Do I qualify for LEOSA?

Yes. LEOSA previously required retirement after an aggregate of 15 years service as a law enforcement officer. The October, 2010 amendments to the statute changed the requirement for a qualified law enforcement officer to an individual that separated (not necessarily retired) from service as a law enforcement officer after serving an aggregate of 10 years or more. For medical separation/retirement, see below.

9. I completed my probationary period as a law enforcement officer, but was injured shortly thereafter and separated from the agency due to a service-connected disability. Do I qualify under LEOSA?

Yes, if your agency determined that you had a service-connected disability and you were separated after completing any applicable probationary period. You must also meet the additional requirements contained in the statute.

10. I served three years at one agency and seven at another before separating. Do I qualify under LEOSA?

Yes. As long as your service at both agencies meets the requirements contained within the statute, you will have served an aggregate of 10 years and are considered a qualified retired law enforcement officer under the statute. The problem for you will be obtaining a retired identification card, as your current agency will likely require proof of service from your first agency which they may or may not recognize. See question 4 above regarding the issuance of identification.

11. My agency will not provide me with the required firearm certification. What can I do?

You do not need to obtain the certification from your agency. Often, it is far easier to obtain the certification from another agency in the state or a qualified firearms instructor. LEOSA requires that you have, not less than one year before the date you are carrying a concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the state or a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that state to have met the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training, as established by the state, to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm. If your state has not established standards, standards set by any law enforcement agency within your state to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm may be used. For "type," see question #1 above.

12. I meet all of the requirements contained in the statute, but I am a reserve officer. Do I qualify?

There are two sections of LEOSA which provide for the ability of Qualified Law Enforcement Officers and Qualified Retired Law Enforcement Officers to carry a concealed weapon in all 50 states. The first section deals with current law enforcement officers, and the second deals with retirees. Neither section draws a distinction between active duty and reserve officers. In October of this year, the language for the "retired" section was changed to allow for individuals that meet all of the requirements of the statute and who separated after 10 years of aggregate service as a law enforcement officer (or who separated after any applicable probationary period due to a service-connected disability, as determined by the agency) but who did not formally "retire" to be "qualified retired law enforcement officers" under the statute. Accordingly, as long as an individual meets all of the requirements of the statute it makes no difference if they are active or reserve, and they would be qualified to carry under LEOSA.
Links to original articles:

http://le.nra.org/leosa/off-limit-areas.aspx

http://le.nra.org/leosa/frequently-asked-questions.aspx

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 03-19-2014 at 09:31..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 09:19   #7
Bill Lumberg
BTF Inventor
 
Bill Lumberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,194
The bolded text is accurate. It has nothing to do with restrictions on permittees in a given state. The section bolded simply iterates the obvious- that private property owners still have the right to control access to and use of their property (I don't have the same right to carry on your land against your wishes off duty as I would if I were on duty and conducting an investigation or serving a warrant), and the less obvious, that off duty/retired carrying under LEOSA are still subject to restrictions pertaining to some government buildings/facilities/parks. I'm overly specific because of the veritable plethora of misconceptions out there regarding LEOSA. Someone thinking that LE under LEOSA must match restrictions placed upon permitholders, depending upon which state they resided in or went to, could have a wildly inaccurate understanding of where, when, and how covered law enforcement can carry. pllbbbt. Cop Talk.
__________________
Did someone talk to you about your TPS reports?
Bill Lumberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2014, 09:24   #8
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg View Post
The bolded text is accurate. It has nothing to do with restrictions on permittees in a given state. The section bolded simply iterates the obvious- that private property owners still have the right to control access to and use of their property (I don't have the same right to carry on your land against your wishes off duty as I would if I were on duty and conducting an investigation or serving a warrant), and the less obvious, that off duty/retired carrying under LEOSA are still subject to restrictions pertaining to some government buildings/facilities/parks. I'm overly specific because of the veritable plethora of misconceptions out there regarding LEOSA. Someone thinking that LE under LEOSA must match restrictions placed upon permitholders, depending upon which state they resided in or went to, could have a wildly inaccurate understanding of where, when, and how covered law enforcement can carry. pllbbbt. Cop Talk.
Yep, just found this from the FOP.

Quote:
Is the exemption provided by the law total—can I now carry anywhere at any
time?
No. The new law exempts all qualified active and retired law enforcement officers from State and
local laws with respect to the carrying of concealed firearms. These officers are not exempt from
Federal law or regulation, which governs the carriage of firearms onto aircraft or other “common
carriers,” Federal buildings, Federal property, or national parks.
In addition, State (not local) laws which prohibit the carriage of firearms onto State or local
government property and State (not local) laws which allow private entities to prohibit firearms on
their private property would still apply to qualified active and retired law enforcement officers.


Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 03-19-2014 at 09:26..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2014, 08:59   #9
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
Draft regulation is out for signature.

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2014, 09:25   #10
crazyasian1
Senior Member
 
crazyasian1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 523
Thanks for the lesson fellas.

Ok, so school me if I'm misunderstanding here. I'll be working under the following assumptions:

1. The DoD/AF have codified the regulation and are actively credentialing qualified LE/Retired LE with appropriate picture ID that states LE status
2. I'm not concerning this with private property or any "special" areas, just generic public spaces

My situation: I'm active duty AF Security Forces, been so for 18 years and counting. I have orders to Maryland and that will be my residency when this actually gets passed. Assuming I've been duly credentialed by my unit, will I be allowed to carry concealed a firearm in the state of MD? All 50 CONUS?

If I understand the interwebz correctly, the law states that I'm authorized to carry the "type" of weapon I qualified on. As far as I can tell, that only differentiates between "semi-auto" and "revolver" correct?

I DO NOT want to have to EDC the 10 lb. Beretta 92...
__________________
famous last words: "Check this **** out..."

Last edited by crazyasian1; 03-20-2014 at 09:26..
crazyasian1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2014, 09:41   #11
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
This is from the DRAFT regulation.

Quote:

1.1.2.1. IAW with LEOSA, individuals must meet the standards established by the agency which requires the employee to regularly qualify on the use of a firearm of the same type as the concealed weapon that will be carried.

1.1.2.1.1. Type of firearm is defined as: handgun (as defined in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Publication 5300.4, Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide, page 7, para 29: The term "handgun" means (A) a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand and (B) any combination of parts from which a firearm described in subparagraph (A) can be assembled.); semi-automatic pistol or revolver; shotgun; rifle; etc. This is not to be confused with “model” which defines the various weapons within the particular weapon type. USAF SF qualify with the M9 pistol; regardless, the type of firearm allowed for carry under 926B credentials will be a semi-automatic pistol or revolver only.

1.1.2.1.2. At SF squadron level and below, authorized to carry a firearm will be defined as currently qualified on the M9 pistol and the individual being identified on the unit arming roster.
Quote:
1.1.2.2. In accordance with LEOSA, the term “firearm” does not include any machine gun as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act, any firearm silencer as defined in section 921 of Title 18 and any destructive device as defined in section 921 of Title 18.
Sorry, you can't CCW a SAW or an M-60 and you'll have to leave your grenades at the office.

LEOSA is good in all 50 States and includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the possessions of the United States (not including the Canal Zone).

They haven't started credentialing yet but they expect that to begin before years end.

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 03-20-2014 at 09:57..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2014, 09:45   #12
crazyasian1
Senior Member
 
crazyasian1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 523
W00T! Thanks a mil happyguy!
__________________
famous last words: "Check this **** out..."
crazyasian1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 08:04   #13
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
AFMAN 31-XXX has been signed and submitted to AFDPO for publication.

Now they need to find a contractor.

From the guy spearheading this:

Quote:
Michael Glunk Folks – My staff and I have been working very hard to stand this program up for the Air Force Security Forces, at the direction of General Jamerson. What I have learned over the past few months is this; most people have not taken the time to read the information that we have been providing. Rumor, assumption and “I thoughts” are prevailing over the facts. I assure you that once the services have issued the credentials, liability for understanding and following the law will fall on the INDIVIDUAL. I implore those people who intend to carry their weapons concealed under LEOSA to READ, READ and READ everything! You will not understand LEOSA by just reading the AFMAN. You have to read the LAWS (All of them)! Yes, I was correct when I said the LAWS (Plural). You may not understand the impact of LEOSA until you educate yourself by reading articles published by FOP, NRA and individuals with personal experience with this Law. IT IS COMPLICATED and could result in personal liability if you are not aware of the actual facts. I know everyone is excited to get their credential…but with great authority comes great responsibility. I ask that everyone get their information from reliable sources, talk to their local PDs, ask questions and make informed decisions before participating in this program. Certain states are in the process of restricting gun laws, and while LEOSA may help you beat the rap…it may not help you beat the ride!
Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 04-05-2014 at 08:07..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 08:52   #14
Ryobi
SummertimeRules
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,445
I don't understand why folks think it's complicated. For traditional law enforcement, it's quite straightforward. It's only those who haven't read it or who go off rumor that should have anything other than clarity.

Last edited by Ryobi; 04-05-2014 at 08:56..
Ryobi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 08:59   #15
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryobi View Post
I don't understand why folks think it's complicated. For traditional law enforcement, it's quite straightforward. It's only those who haven't read it or who go off rumor that should have anything other than clarity.
Military law enforcement operates in a whole other universe and anytime anyone does anything there is never a shortage of cya.

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 04-05-2014 at 09:00..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2014, 12:49   #16
Bill Lumberg
BTF Inventor
 
Bill Lumberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,194
My son is in a police battalion or whatever they call it, overseas. His is the only police unit thre- the rest are security forces. LEOSA is not a high priority issue with tem. But theyre still young and far from retirement.
__________________
Did someone talk to you about your TPS reports?
Bill Lumberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2014, 11:21   #17
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
The Army has decided to join the USAF Contracting effort which will put them on the same timeline as AF recipients.

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 04-18-2014 at 11:22..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2014, 17:23   #18
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
April 13th:

On my behalf of Mr. Glunk, USAF SF HQ:

I have a LEOSA update for our Army and AF followers: The USA is currently staffing their LEOSA guidance which, as stated previously, follows the example of the certified AF guidance. Additionally, The Army has decided to join the AF Contracting effort which will put them on the same timeline as AF recipients. The AFSFC and HQDA OPMG will be meeting with contracting officials in the next few weeks to finalize the Performance Work Statement that will be used to select the final contracting agency. We are hopeful that a Contractor will be selected within the next 60-90 days and the On-Line Application process will available on a commercial network sometime late this summer and initial issuance of credentials for both the Army and Air Force shortly thereafter. I again ask for patience as we continue to rapidly build this program stand this process up. Finally, the AFSFC is also working with USN POCs to determine the viability of using the Air Force/Army model for credential issuance. More to come for our Navy followers…
V/R
Michael Glunk

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2014, 17:14   #19
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
Latest update:

Quote:
Update from Mr.Glunk -
Defenders - Air Force Installation Contracting Agency (AFICA), Wright Patterson AFB, OH, has selected a contractor to issue LEOSA credentials to past/present AF law enforcement personnel. Congratulations to Defense Consulting Services (DCS) on their selection. The AFSFC and DCS staffs will now finalize the process of developing the on-line application process and credential. We will begin beta testing of this process in the very near future and hope to have examples of what our credential will look like shortly. I continue to ask for your patience as we work diligently to move this process forward. [U][B]Our estimated start date for credential issuance remains 1 Sep 14 with the cost of a 926B credential at $140 and [B][U]the cost of a 926C credential at $160 which will be valid for 5 years. We will continue to keep you posted on our progress.- Nelson
Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 06-14-2014 at 17:15..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2014, 18:37   #20
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,261
Quote:
Update: LEOSA Implementation - DODI 5525.12, Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (LEOSA) Department of Defense implementation was approved 13 FEB 14. The Army Directive and implementation instructions are currently in staffing for Secretary of the Army approval. Concurrently to the staffing of Army guidance, a no-cost to the government, contract is being developed to centrally implement LEOSA Army wide. Once the Army Directive, Implementation instructions and Contract have been finalized the Link to the Application Web site will be posted on the OPMG Web site. The Application web site, operated by a contractor, will contain the application process, who is eligible for credentials, instructions, required documents, electronic application and fees required by the individual. At the present time our goal is implementation mid 1st Quarter FY15, however time line is dependent on approval of Army Directive and award date of contract.
Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:00.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 767
176 Members
591 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31