CFB Gagetown now called 5th Canadian Div Support Base

[FJAG]

I'll just add a little to this thread as I do not have access to the DWAN and therefore can't confirm actual details.

The status as an organization as a unit (commanded by a CO) or a formation (commanded by a formation commander) depends on how it is described in the establishing Canadian Forces Organization Order (CFOO). The CFOO sets down all lines of authority and from it flows the powers of its CO/commander.

If I was to take a guess, I'd say major bases, regardless of their name, would be units (commanded by COs) that report to their superior formations.

 

[Rifleman62]

Would this not be covered on a change of command when the BComd gets a letter from higher, IAW  QR & O, stating he/she has i.e. the powers of punishment of a CO or Superior Comd?

In a simple form, with all these"name" changes, new letters are required.

 

[dapaterson]

There is a provision within the QR&Os that permits the CDS to designate individuals as commanding officers even though they are not in command of a unit (a base is a unit).  That is how the Ceremonial Guard (organizationally, a detachment of the Governor General's Footguards) has a CO.  Thus, designations of COs can be made to ensure the smooth operation of the new structure.



Per volume 1 chapter 1 of the QR&O:

"commanding officer" (commandant)
means
except when the Chief of the Defence Staff otherwise directs, an officer in command of a base, unit or element, or
any other officer designated as a commanding officer by or under the authority of the Chief of the Defence Staff;

 

[FJAG]

There is a provision within the QR&Os that permits the CDS to designate individuals as commanding officers even though they are not in command of a unit (a base is a unit).  That is how the Ceremonial Guard (organizationally, a detachment of the Governor General's Footguards) has a CO.  Thus, designations of COs can be made to ensure the smooth operation of the new structure.

That is a useful function for an organization that has only a temporary existence or a similar circumstance. Permanent CF organizations are established and defined by CFOOs and of course Ministerial Organization Orders (MOOs) (sorry I should have mentioned MOOs in the previous post).

Attached is a sample CFOO.

:cheers:

 

[dapaterson]

No, permanent CF organizations are established and defined by Ministerial Organizational Orders (MOOs), which in turn the CDS expands upon in Canadian Forces Organizational Orders (CFOO).  Can't have a CFOO without a MOO.

A MOO will state that prior MOOs are rescinded (or that this is the first MOO for the unit or formation), name the unit, assign it to a component (Reg, Res, or when so constituted the Special Force), and assign it to a formation - even formations are assigned to formations.


CO designations are fairly common - the Ceremonial Guard gets a new one every time a new Reg F Major is posted in, for example.  Whether that is an appropriate approach is a topic best discussed over libations of choice. :cheers:

 

[FJAG]

I think that's what I said but the real point of my post is to say that speculation is interesting but a futile exercise. One of you who does have access to the DWAN/DIN should simply look up the new or amended MOO/CFOO for these bases and then settle the issue.

:nod:

 

[dapaterson]

...except depending on the approach selected, the bases may no longer be units but rather be detachments of the larger entity, in which case they will have neither MOO nor CFOO.

 

[FJAG]

Your profile says current member. Go look and let me know what you find. Despite myself I'm actually getting interested in this.

;D

 

[Old EO Tech]

Your profile says current member. Go look and let me know what you find. Despite myself I'm actually getting interested in this.

;D

Yes I'll have to see what paperwork is in existence, if the former ASU's are now not "units" any longer I assume that can only happen with some sort of paperwork, if not a MOO/CFOO, then something rescinding the old ones.  And if the former ASU's are just dets under the CDSB/ASB concept, the CDS could appoint a "CO" of the detachment.  IIRC the 742 Det Wainwright back when I was their did have a Capt as a CO.  Though I'm not sure what level of approval created that designation.

 

[dapaterson]

From what I can see, the amended CFOOs have yet to be promulgated (at least to the DWAN repository).  Thus, this will remain one of life's great mysteries... for now...

 

[Bzzliteyr]

...I've just gone cross eyed reading this thread.

 

[kratz]

+300  :goodpost:

 

[Brandonfw]

I grew up near CFB Gagetown. To me, it will ALWAYS be CFB Gagetown. Always. Forever. I'll never squeal!!  :threat: lol

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

OK, I'll stir the pot then:

If the Canadian Army can rename the CF bases it "controls" to "Xth Canadian Div Support Base" (Why not just "Camp Gagetown", for instance ???), then does it mean that the RCN can rename the CF bases it "controls" as HMC Dockyard Halifax, HMCS Stadaconna and HMCS Shearwater, for CFB Halifax and HMC Dockyard Esquimalt and HMCS Naden for CFB Esquimalt ? 

 

[Old EO Tech]

OK, I'll stir the pot then:

If the Canadian Army can rename the CF bases it "controls" to "Xth Canadian Div Support Base" (Why not just "Camp Gagetown", for instance ???), then does it mean that the RCN can rename the CF bases it "controls" as HMC Dockyard Halifax, HMCS Stadaconna and HMCS Shearwater, for CFB Halifax and HMC Dockyard Esquimalt and HMCS Naden for CFB Esquimalt ?

They, like the CA and RCAF are free to change the name of support organizations on bases all they want.  All bases belong to the CF and are therefore CFB putyournamehere regardless of what you chose to put on the sign by the gate.  Until the NDA is changed we will have a CFB Gagetown, CFB Halifax and CFB Cold Lake.  They might be refereed to as 5 CDSB Gagetown, HMCS Stadaconna, and 4 Wing Cold Lake, but that doesn't change the NDA, it is just branding/reorganizing.  Like I said before, CFB Gagetown was the home to 3 Area Support Group, now with the Divisions coming in it's 5 Can Div Support Group, so very little has changed.....move on to your homes there is nothing to see here...

 

[dapaterson]

There's nothing in the NDA to dictate that it's CFB Gagetown or anything similar.  A base is a type of unit.  A unit is a collection of personnel and materiel organized under the authority of the Minister.

It is the Minister, through the use of a Ministerial Organizational Order (MOO), who dictates the names of units.  The CDS then expands on the MOO with a Canadian Forces Organizational Order (CFOO).

Thus, the change to names of Army bases is done by the MND, under the authority of the NDA.


For more information, find a copy of CFP 219.

 

[Old EO Tech]

There's nothing in the NDA to dictate that it's CFB Gagetown or anything similar.  A base is a type of unit.  A unit is a collection of personnel and materiel organized under the authority of the Minister.

It is the Minister, through the use of a Ministerial Organizational Order (MOO), who dictates the names of units.  The CDS then expands on the MOO with a Canadian Forces Organizational Order (CFOO).

Thus, the change to names of Army bases is done by the MND, under the authority of the NDA.


For more information, find a copy of CFP 219.

Understood, maybe I should have been a little more generic, all bases/units belong to the CF, therefore they are CF Bases/units, whether they are officially named that in a MOO/CFOO.  Without opening the NDA right now, I'm sure the fact that all bases belong to the CF/DND is in the NDA.....

Regardless, we will have to wait to see what the new MOO/CFOO says since it is not published yet.  But I'll put beer on the fact that "CFB Gagetown" is not disappearing but that 3 ASG is, in order to make 5 CDSB...much like CFB Borden and CFSTG Borden exist concurrently. 

But for now this is all speculation.

Cheers

 

[quadrapiper]

Regardless, we will have to wait to see what the new MOO/CFOO says since it is not published yet.  But I'll put beer on the fact that "CFB Gagetown" is not disappearing but that 3 ASG is, in order to make 5 CDSB...much like CFB Borden and CFSTG Borden exist concurrently.

Biggest difference is in the common-usage side of things - whether the usual point of reference is the tenant or the real estate. Certainly, I already hear "Dockyard," "Naden," and "19 Wing" more often than CFB Esquimalt or Comox.

 

[FJAG]

OK, I'll stir the pot then:

If the Canadian Army can rename the CF bases it "controls" to "Xth Canadian Div Support Base" (Why not just "Camp Gagetown", for instance ???), then does it mean that the RCN can rename the CF bases it "controls" as HMC Dockyard Halifax, HMCS Stadaconna and HMCS Shearwater, for CFB Halifax and HMC Dockyard Esquimalt and HMCS Naden for CFB Esquimalt ?

Any other old timers here?  If my mind isn't completely addled weren't these things named Camp Shilo, Camp Petawawa, Camp Gagetown etc back in the early 60s before all they became CFBs?

:warstory:

 

[armyvern]

Any other old timers here?  If my mind isn't completely addled weren't these things named Camp Shilo, Camp Petawawa, Camp Gagetown etc back in the early 60s before all they became CFBs?

:warstory:

I was just going to post to that effect in response to the (obviously) young lad's earlier post about having grown up in the "CFB Gagetown" area and thus it would always be known to him as such.

Me too --- I being apparently much older than he (but am a hair less than 45 thanks cripes), drove people nuts by calling it Camp Gagetown which it will always be to me.  And, I am quite certain that the "Welcome to Camp Gagetown" sign was still at the front gate when I was posted out in 09 although there were rumours that it was to come down when the "new" front gate was opened up. Alas it may now be gone.