DOMESTIC OPERATIONAL LAW 

HANDBOOK 

2011 

FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES 

CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS 

1 September 2011 

 

2011 DOMESTIC OPERATIONAL LAW HANDBOOK 

A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES 

EDITORS 

LTC Jeffrey Spears, USAR 

LCDR Brian Robinson, USCG 

LT Ben Gullo, USCG 

2011 CONTRIBUTORS 

COL Michael Noyes LTC Erin McMahon 

LTC Todd Milliard MAJ Bayne Johnston 

MAJ José Gonzalez MAJ Hobe Schultz 

MAJ Gonzalo Pinacho Mr. William Berkson 

CPT James Blakeman Mr. Paul Skirtich 

Mr. John Rowe 

as well as the General Counsel Office, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, and numerous past 

editors and contributors to the Domestic Operational Law Handbook.
 

Cover design by Ms. Cherie A. Hulsman-Reid, 

The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center & School 

The contents of this publication are not to be construed as official positions, policies, or decisions of 

the United States Government or any department or agency thereof. 

 

EDITORS’ NOTES 

The Domestic Operational Law (DOPLAW) Handbook for Judge Advocates is a product of the 

Center for Law and Military Operations (CLAMO). Its content is derived from statutes, Executive 

Orders and Directives, national policy, DoD Directives, joint publications, service regulations and 

field manuals, and lessons learned by judge advocates and other practitioners throughout federal 

and state government. This edition includes a substantial revision of Chapter 3, it incorporates new 

guidance as set for forth Department of Defense Directive 3025.18, Defense Support of Civil 

Authorities (DSCA), it provides amplifying information on wildfire response, emergency mutual 

assistance compacts, the role of the National Guard and Army units such as Army North and Joint 

Task Force—Civil Support, and it discusses the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

The Handbook is designed to serve as a working reference and training tool for judge advocates. 

However, this Handbook is not a substitute for independent research. With the exception of 

footnoted doctrinal material, the information contained in this Handbook is not doctrine. Judge 

Advocates advising in this area of the law should monitor developments in domestic operations 

closely as the landscape continues to evolve. Further, the information and samples provided in this 

Handbook are advisory only. Finally, the content and opinions expressed in this Handbook do not 

represent the official position of the U.S. Army or the other services, the National Guard Bureau, 

the Office of The Judge Advocate General, The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and 

School, or any other government agency. 

This Handbook is also available in electronic format from the CLAMO website at 

https://www.jagcnet.army.mil/8525751D00557EFF. CLAMO also provides lessons learned from 

domestic operations and other resources at its Domestic Operations portal at the CLAMO website. 

The continued vitality of this publication depends upon feedback from the field. Accordingly, 

CLAMO encourages your suggestions, comments, and work products for incorporation into the 

next edition of this Handbook. You may contact CLAMO at (434) 971-3248/3210 (COMM), 521­

3248/3210 (DSN), via email at CLAMO@conus.army.mil or 

clamo.clamotjaglcs@us.army.smil.mil, or at 600 Massie Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903­

1781. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PREFACE ........................................................................................................................................................................... i
 

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS ................................................................................... 1
 

A. BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................................................... 1
 

B. PURPOSE OF THIS HANDBOOK............................................................................................................................. 2
 

C. DOD’S ROLE IN CIVIL SUPPORT.......................................................................................................................... 2
 

D. DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES (DSCA) ........................................................................................... 4
 

E. HANDBOOK ORGANIZATION ............................................................................................................................... 6
 

CHAPTER 2: NATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR INCIDENT MANAGEMENT ......................................................................... 7
 

A. THE FEDERAL RESPONSE STRUCTURE .................................................................................................................. 8
 

1.	 HSPD-5 ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
 

2.	 HSPD-8 AND THE NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS GUIDELINES ......................................................................... 9
 

3.	 EXECUTIVE ORDER 12656: EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE RESPONSIBILITIES ................... 10
 

4.	 THE NATIONAL RESPONSE FRAMEWORK (NRF) ........................................................................................ 12
 

5.	 NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ........................................................................................... 18
 

6.	 HSPD-8, ANNEX I, NATIONAL PLANNING ................................................................................................. 19
 

7.	 INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE NRF AND OTHER PLANS APPLICABLE TO WMD RESPONSE AND 

RECOVERY ................................................................................................................................................. 21
 

8.	 IMPACT OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT ON THE FEDERAL RESPONSE STRUCTURE AND PROCESS ....... 22
 

9.	 DEFENSE AGAINST WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION ACT...................................................................... 23
 

B. THE STAFFORD ACT .......................................................................................................................................... 23
 

1.	 REQUESTS FOR EMERGENCY OR MAJOR DISASTER DECLARATIONS .......................................................... 26
 

2.	 LIABILITY UNDER THE STAFFORD ACT ...................................................................................................... 28
 

3.	 MAIN TAKEAWAYS CONCERNING THE STAFFORD ACT .............................................................................. 28
 

C. SUBORDINATE COMMANDER'S IMMEDIATE RESPONSE AUTHORITY.................................................................. 28 

D. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................................... 29
 

CHAPTER 3: DOD RESPONSE FOR CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL, NUCLEAR, AND HIGH-YIELD
 

EXPLOSIVES (CBRNE) CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................... 31
 

A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 31
 

B. CBRNE CM OVERVIEW AND AUTHORITIES ..................................................................................................... 33
 

C. DOD ENTITIES RESPONSIBLE FOR CBRNE CM OPERATIONS .......................................................................... 37
 

D. SPECIALIZED DOD CBRNE RESPONDERS......................................................................................................... 38
 

1.	 JOINT TASK FORCE CIVIL SUPPORT ........................................................................................................... 38
 

2.	 NATIONAL GUARD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION CIVIL SUPPORT TEAMS......................................... 40
 

E. SPECIAL LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS DURING CBRNE CM OPERATIONS ............................................................ 42
 

1.	 QUARANTINE / ISOLATION ......................................................................................................................... 42
 

3.	 HEALTH CARE LICENSURE......................................................................................................................... 43
 

4.	 MORTUARY AFFAIRS ................................................................................................................................. 45
 

CHAPTER 4: MILITARY SUPPORT TO CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT ........................................................................ 47
 

A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 47
 

B. THE POSSE COMITATUS ACT............................................................................................................................. 48
 

1.	 TO WHOM DOES THE PCA APPLY? ............................................................................................................ 49
 

2.	 WHERE DOES THE PCA APPLY? ................................................................................................................ 50
 

Table of Contents 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

3. TO WHAT DOES THE PCA APPLY? .............................................................................................................51
 

CHAPTER 5: CIVIL DISTURBANCE OPERATIONS ..........................................................................................................67
 

A. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 67
 

B. CIVIL DISTURBANCE STATUTES.........................................................................................................................68
 

1.	 SUPPORT A STATE REQUEST .......................................................................................................................69
 

2.	 ENFORCE FEDERAL AUTHORITY .................................................................................................................70
 

3.	 PROTECT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ...........................................................................................................71
 

4.	 PROCEDURAL ISSUES .................................................................................................................................. 71
 

C. OTHER AUTHORITY ........................................................................................................................................... 73
 

1.	 PROTECTION OF FEDERAL PROPERTY .........................................................................................................73
 

2.	 EMERGENCY ............................................................................................................................................... 73
 

D. RESPONSIBILITIES AND RELATIONSHIPS OF PARTIES INVOLVED IN CIVIL DISTURBANCE OPERATIONS .............74
 

1.	 ATTORNEY GENERAL ................................................................................................................................. 74
 

2.	 SENIOR CIVILIAN REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.............................................................74
 

3.	 ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HOMELAND DEFENSE AND AMERICAS’ SECURITY 

AFFAIRS ...................................................................................................................................................... 74
 

4.	 CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, JOINT DIRECTOR OF MILITARY SUPPORT (JDOMS) .........................75
 

5.	 COMBATANT COMMANDERS, U.S. NORTHERN COMMAND AND U.S. PACIFIC COMMAND..........................75
 

6.	 COMMANDER, U.S. ARMY NORTH..............................................................................................................75
 

7.	 COMMANDER, JOINT CIVIL DISTURBANCE TASK FORCE ............................................................................75
 

8.	 NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU .......................................................................................................................76
 

9.	 THE NATIONAL GUARD ..............................................................................................................................76
 

E.	 THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVIL DISTURBANCE PLANS (COMBATANT COMMANDERS’
 

CONPLANS) ..................................................................................................................................................... 77
 

1.	 CIVIL DISTURBANCE OPERATIONS MISSION ...............................................................................................77
 

2.	 COMBATANT COMMANDERS’ CONPLANS ................................................................................................77
 

3.	 THE STANDING RULES FOR THE USE OF FORCE FOR U.S. FORCES ..............................................................79
 

4. OTHER LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................................................83
 

CHAPTER 6: COUNTERDRUG OPERATIONS ...................................................................................................................87
 

A. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 87
 

B. TITLE 10 SUPPORT TO COUNTERDRUG OPERATIONS..........................................................................................88
 

1.	 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1991 ..................................................................................88
 

2.	 DETECTION AND MONITORING ...................................................................................................................90
 

3.	 CJCS IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................................................................................91
 

4.	 COUNTERDRUG SUPPORT TASK FORCES.....................................................................................................92
 

5.	 COAST GUARD LAW ENFORCEMENT DETACHMENTS .................................................................................94
 

C. NATIONAL GUARD SUPPORT TO COUNTERDRUG OPERATIONS ..........................................................................97
 

CHAPTER 7: MILITARY SUPPORT TO SPECIAL EVENTS .............................................................................................103
 

A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 103
 

B. DESIGNATED SPECIAL EVENTS ........................................................................................................................103
 

1.	 TYPES OF EVENTS ..................................................................................................................................... 104
 

2.	 REQUESTS FOR SUPPORT...........................................................................................................................107
 

C. INNOVATIVE READINESS TRAINING .................................................................................................................109
 

1.	 INNOVATIVE READINESS TRAINING PROCEDURES ....................................................................................109
 

2.	 LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR IRT PROJECTS ...........................................................................................111
 

Table of Contents 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 8: MISCELLANEOUS DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS........................................................................... 113
 

A. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 113
 

B. DISASTER AND DOMESTIC EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ..................................................................................... 114
 

1. MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO SAFETY AND TRAFFIC ................................................................................... 114
 

2. SEARCH AND RESCUE OPERATIONS ......................................................................................................... 115
 

3. EMPLOYMENT OF DOD RESOURCES IN SUPPORT OF U.S. POSTAL SERVICE ............................................. 116
 

4. NATIONAL DISASTER MEDICAL SYSTEM ................................................................................................. 116
 

5. ANIMAL AND PLANT DISEASE ERADICATION........................................................................................... 118
 

6. MASS IMMIGRATION EMERGENCY ........................................................................................................... 118
 

7. IMPROVISED NUCLEAR DEVICE INCIDENTS.............................................................................................. 119
 

8. DOD RESPONSE TO RADIOLOGICAL ACCIDENTS...................................................................................... 119
 

9. DOD SUPPORT TO WILDFIRES.................................................................................................................. 120
 

C. ENVIRONMENTAL MISSIONS ........................................................................................................................... 124
 

D. MISSIONS IN SUPPORT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT............................................................................................... 126
 

1. SUPPORT OF UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE........................................................................................ 126
 

2. IMAGERY INTELLIGENCE AND GEOSPATIAL SUPPORT .............................................................................. 126
 

3. CRITICAL ASSET ASSURANCE PROGRAM ................................................................................................. 127
 

4. CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS POLICIES AND PLANNING .......................................................................... 127
 

5. EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL ........................................................................................................... 128
 

E. COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE ............................................................................................................................... 128
 

1. NATIONAL GUARD ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN YOUTH AND CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS ................... 129
 

2. SUPPORT AND SERVICES FOR ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS AND ACTIVITIES OUTSIDE DOD ...................... 129
 

3. NATIONAL GUARD CIVILIAN YOUTH OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM ............................................................ 130
 

4. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS ..................................................................................................... 130
 

F. PANDEMIC INFLUENZA .................................................................................................................................... 131
 

CHAPTER 9: INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT AND INFORMATION HANDLING DURING DOMESTIC AND
 

DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 135
 

A. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 136
 

B. THE ROLE OF DOD INTELLIGENCE COMPONENTS IN DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS ................................ 137
 

C. INFORMATION HANDLING AND THE ROLE OF DOD NON-INTEL COMPONENTS ............................................... 140
 

D. THE NATIONAL GUARD ................................................................................................................................... 141
 

1. STATUS: TITLE 32 OR TITLE 10 ................................................................................................................ 141
 

2. COLLECTION VIA AN INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITY ........................................................................................ 142
 

3. METHOD OF COLLECTING ........................................................................................................................ 142
 

4. PURPOSE OF THE COLLECTION ................................................................................................................. 143
 

E. JUDGE ADVOCATE RESPONSIBILITIES ............................................................................................................. 144
 

CHAPTER 10: RESERVE COMPONENTS, CIVIL AIR PATROL, U.S. COAST GUARD - STATUS AND 

RELATIONSHIPS .................................................................................................................................................... 147
 

A. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 147
 

B. RESERVE COMPONENT .................................................................................................................................... 148
 

1. U.S. ARMY RESERVE (USAR) ................................................................................................................. 148
 

2. U.S. AIR FORCE RESERVE (USAFR) ....................................................................................................... 148
 

3. U.S. NAVAL RESERVE (USNR) ............................................................................................................... 149
 

4. U.S. MARINE CORPS RESERVE (USMCR)............................................................................................... 149
 

Table of Contents 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

5. U.S. COAST GUARD RESERVE (USCGR) ..................................................................................................149
 

6. NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES (NGUS) ...............................................................................150
 

C. RESERVE COMPONENT CATEGORIES................................................................................................................153
 

1. READY RESERVE ...................................................................................................................................... 154
 

2. STANDBY RESERVE .................................................................................................................................. 155
 

3. RETIRED RESERVE .................................................................................................................................... 156
 

D. RESERVE COMPONENT TRAINING AND SUPPORT .............................................................................................156
 

1. TRAINING ................................................................................................................................................. 156
 

2. SUPPORT ................................................................................................................................................... 157
 

3. MILITARY TECHNICIANS (DUAL STATUS) (MT) .......................................................................................158
 

E. MOBILIZATION/ACTIVATION OF RESERVE COMPONENT AND CALLING UP THE MILITIA .................................158
 

1. FULL MOBILIZATION (10 U.S.C A. § 12301(A)) ......................................................................................159
 

2. PARTIAL MOBILIZATION (10 U.S.C A. § 12302(A)) .................................................................................159
 

3. PRESIDENTIAL RESERVE CALL-UP (PRC) (10 U.S.C A. § 12304) ............................................................159
 

4. INVASIONS AND REBELLIONS (10 U.S.C A. § 12406) ...............................................................................160
 

5. THE INSURRECTION ACT (10 U.S.C A. § 331-335) ...................................................................................160
 

6. 15-DAY INVOLUNTARY FEDERAL ACTIVE DUTY (10 U.S.C A. § 12301(B)) ............................................160
 

7. VOLUNTARY FEDERAL ACTIVE DUTY (10 U.S.C A. § 12301(D)) ............................................................160
 

8. MEDICAL CARE (10 U.S.C A. § 12301(H))...............................................................................................160
 

F. UNITED STATES COAST GUARD (USCG) .........................................................................................................161
 

G. NATIONAL GUARD OF THE SEVERAL STATES...................................................................................................163
 

1. OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................ 163
 

2. TITLE 32 STATUS ...................................................................................................................................... 163
 

3. STATE ACTIVE DUTY ................................................................................................................................ 164
 

4. ANG/ARNG PERSONNEL CATEGORIES....................................................................................................165
 

5. UNIQUE HLS/HLD MISSIONS ...................................................................................................................167
 

6. MISCELLANEOUS AREAS OF CAUTION ......................................................................................................167
 

H. CIVIL AIR PATROL (CAP) ................................................................................................................................ 171
 

I. JUDGE ADVOCATES ......................................................................................................................................... 171
 

1. NATIONAL GUARD JUDGE ADVOCATES ....................................................................................................171
 

2. U.S. ARMY RESERVE JUDGE ADVOCATES ................................................................................................172
 

3. U.S. AIR FORCE RESERVE JUDGE ADVOCATES.........................................................................................172
 

4. U.S. NAVAL RESERVE JUDGE ADVOCATES...............................................................................................173
 

5. U.S. MARINE RESERVE LEGAL SPECIALISTS ............................................................................................173
 

6. U.S. COAST GUARD RESERVE LEGAL SPECIALISTS ..................................................................................173
 

CHAPTER 11: RULES FOR THE USE OF FORCE FOR FEDERAL FORCES......................................................................175
 

A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 175
 

B. THE JUDGE ADVOCATE’S ROLE IN THE USE OF FORCE ....................................................................................176
 

C. PRACTICAL REALITIES OF USE OF FORCE SITUATIONS ....................................................................................178
 

1. CAPABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS ..............................................................................................................178
 

2. PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS ...............................................................................................179
 

D. LEGAL AUTHORITY AND STANDARD FOR U.S. MILITARY USE OF FORCE IN DOMESTIC OPERATIONS ............179
 

1. MINIMUM FORCE NECESSARY OR DEADLY FORCE AS A LAST RESORT ....................................................181
 

2. MANDATORY VERBAL WARNINGS ...........................................................................................................182
 

3. DENIAL OF DEADLY FORCE IN SELF-DEFENSE .........................................................................................182
 

4. OPERATIONAL ORDERS/EXECUTION ORDERS ...........................................................................................182
 

Table of Contents 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

5. SRUF AUTHORITY TO USE DEADLY FORCE ............................................................................................ 183
 

6. OTHER MISSION RELATED CIRCUMSTANCES FOR USE OF DEADLY FORCE ................................................. 184
 

7. AUGMENTATION OF THE RUF.................................................................................................................. 185
 

E. LIABILITY FOR SERVICE MEMBERS, LEADERS, AND RUF DRAFTERS IN USE OF FORCE SITUATIONS .............. 185
 

1. FEDERAL CIVIL LIABILITY ....................................................................................................................... 185
 

2. FEDERAL CRIMINAL LIABILITY................................................................................................................ 187
 

3. STATE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY................................................................................................... 188
 

F. OTHER TRIAL OR LITIGATION ISSUES.............................................................................................................. 188
 

G. COMMON ISSUES IN DRAFTING AND TRAINING RUF ...................................................................................... 189
 

1. TRAINING OF JUDGE ADVOCATES ............................................................................................................ 189
 

2. SRUF AND AREAS OF CONFUSION AND CONCERN................................................................................... 190
 

CHAPTER 12: RULES FOR THE USE OF FORCE FOR THE NATIONAL GUARD ............................................................ 193
 

A. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 193
 

B. RUF AND STATE CRIMINAL LAWS .................................................................................................................. 194
 

1. STATE LAW APPLICABLE TO BOTH TITLE 32 AND SAD STATUSES .......................................................... 194
 

2. SUBJECTS FOR INCLUSION IN STATE RUF FOR THE NATIONAL GUARD ................................................... 195
 

C. SPECIFIC RUF ISSUES ..................................................................................................................................... 201
 

1. RUF IN INTER-STATE (CROSS BORDER) OPERATIONS.............................................................................. 201
 

2. STATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF NATIONAL GUARD MEMBERS FOR USE OF FORCE ................................. 203
 

3. RUF IN MIXED NATIONAL GUARD AND ACTIVE COMPONENT OPERATIONS ........................................... 206
 

D. ROLE OF THE NATIONAL GUARD JUDGE ADVOCATE ....................................................................... 206
 

1. DRAFTING RUF ....................................................................................................................................... 206
 

2. NEGOTIATING RUF WITH STATE AGENCIES ............................................................................................ 207
 

3. PROVIDING LEGAL ADVICE ON LIABILITY ............................................................................................... 207
 

4. TRAINING ................................................................................................................................................. 207
 

CHAPTER 13: FUNDING DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS ...................................................................................... 209
 

A. INTRODUCTION: BASIC FISCAL LAW FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................... 210
 

B. BASIC FISCAL CONTROLS ................................................................................................................................ 211
 

1. PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................................. 211
 

2. TIME ........................................................................................................................................................ 212
 

3. AMOUNT .................................................................................................................................................. 213
 

C. MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO CIVIL AUTHORITIES.............................................................................................. 214
 

D. DODD 3025.15 ............................................................................................................................................... 215
 

E. DISASTER AND EMERGENCY RELIEF ............................................................................................................... 216
 

1. IMMEDIATE RESPONSE AUTHORITY ......................................................................................................... 217
 

2. DERF ...................................................................................................................................................... 217
 

3. DISASTER SUPPORT INVOLVING LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES ....................................................... 218
 

F. CIVIL DISTURBANCES ..................................................................................................................................... 218
 

G. SUPPORT TO CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT.................................................................................................... 219
 

1. ECONOMY ACT ........................................................................................................................................ 220
 

2. MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS ..................................................................................................................... 220
 

3. EXCESS PROPERTY ................................................................................................................................... 221
 

4. EXPERT ADVICE AND TRAINING .............................................................................................................. 222
 

5. SHARING INFORMATION........................................................................................................................... 223
 

H. COUNTERDRUG SUPPORT ................................................................................................................................ 223
 

Table of Contents 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

1. DETECTION AND MONITORING .................................................................................................................223
 

2. ADDITIONAL SUPPORT ..............................................................................................................................224
 

I. INNOVATIVE READINESS TRAINING .................................................................................................................225
 

J. DOD SUPPORT TO SPECIAL EVENTS.................................................................................................................226
 

K. SUPPORT TO PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS..............................................................................227
 

1. BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA........................................................................................................................227
 

2. GIRL SCOUTS OF AMERICA .......................................................................................................................227
 

3. NATIONAL VETERANS’ ORGANIZATIONS..................................................................................................227
 

4. AMERICAN RED CROSS.............................................................................................................................227
 

5. NATIONAL MILITARY ASSOCIATIONS .......................................................................................................227
 

6. HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS ..........................................................................................................................228
 

L. LOAN OR LEASE OF NON-EXCESS PROPERTY OF A MILITARY DEPARTMENT ...................................................228
 

1. AUTHORIZED LOAN OR LEASE OF NON-EXCESS PROPERTY ........................................................................228
 

2. EMERGENCY EXCEPTIONS ........................................................................................................................229
 

M. MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO SAFETY AND TRAFFIC ...........................................................................................230
 

N. EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL ...................................................................................................................230
 

O. MILITARY WORKING DOGS .............................................................................................................................231
 

P. MISCELLANEOUS SUPPORT ..............................................................................................................................231
 

Q. MISCELLANEOUS EXCEPTIONS.........................................................................................................................231
 

Table of Contents 
 

 

 

 

1

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

PREFACE 

Cal Lederer1
 

Deputy Judge Advocate General, U.S. Coast Guard 

and 

23rd Commandant, The Judge Advocate General’s School, U.S. Army
 

The Domestic Operational Law Handbook for Judge Advocates – the DOPLAW Handbook – was 

first published in April, 2001. As we in Charlottesville watched it develop, its focus was the 

activities of the Department of Defense. While it recognized the important role of the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency – FEMA, other Federal agencies, and the States, the DOPLAW 

Handbook was very much about the military departments and the National Guard and their 

authorities. While it recognized that the scope of Domestic Operations – or DOMOPS – was broad, 

the DOPLAW Handbook’s focus was military support to law enforcement, natural disaster relief, 

and civil unrest. 

That changed after 9/11. The second edition, published in July, 2006, reflected the dramatic 

evolution and expansion of DOMOPS into what was now called homeland security and homeland 

defense. It recognized the establishment of NORTHCOM and the Department of Homeland 

Security, it incorporated the National Response Plan and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 

5 – Management of Domestic Incidents, and it reflected the wide range of national strategies and 

policies that were issued to address threats to the homeland. The 2006 edition also embraced 

lessons learned from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita that occurred the previous August and September. 

The July, 2009, edition and its 2010 revision expanded to include a discussion of a Federal response 

to a pandemic and broadened the focus on Homeland Security operations. The 2011 edition 

continues that evolution and provides a more detailed look at some of the integral DoD agencies, 

including NORTHCOM, Army North, Joint Task Force–Civil Support, the vast capabilities of 

agencies like the National Guard Bureau and the Coast Guard, and the multitude of DOMOPS that 

DoD is tasked to support, such as major disaster or emergency response, counterdrug operations, 

and support to National Security Special Events. It also incorporates the lessons learned by the 

exceptionally diverse community of judge advocates, other attorneys, paralegals, and other legal 

professionals, who have practiced DOPLAW daily, frequently, or, for the novices thrust into this 

dynamic realm for a particular contingency, rarely or only once. 

 Calvin M. Lederer was appointed to the Senior Executive Service and became Deputy Chief Counsel of the U.S. 

Coast Guard on June 2, 2002. In March 2003, he was designated the Deputy Judge Advocate General when the Coast 

Guard became part of the Department of Homeland Security. Mr. Lederer served as Acting Judge Advocate General 

during the Deepwater Horizon Response from April 2010 to January 2011. In his earlier Army career, Mr. Lederer’s 

assignments included service as the Commandant of The Judge Advocate General’s School; Executive Officer to The 

Judge Advocate General; Staff Judge Advocate, V Corps; the Army’s Chief Legislative Counsel, Chief Environmental 

Counsel, and Chief Labor and Employment Law Counsel; Special Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General (Civil 

Division); and Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, 25th Infantry Division. Mr. Lederer was named a Presidential 

Distinguished Executive in 2008 and a Presidential Meritorious Executive in 2006, and his military awards include the 

Legion of Merit and Meritorious Service Medal – earning each award four times, and the Distinguished Service Medal. 

Mr. Lederer is a graduate of New York University, Hofstra University School of Law, the U.S. Army Command & 

General Staff College, and The Judge Advocate General’s School. He was also an Army War College Fellow. 

i Preface 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Since 2006, local, State and Federal assets have responded to a series of contingencies. These have 

included natural disasters like hurricanes, western wildfires, last year’s tsunami, mid-west floods, 

and other events with widespread impact. Most recently, the sustained and massive release of oil 

from the Macondo well from April to July 2010, after the explosion of the Mobile Offshore Drilling 

Unit Deepwater Horizon, and its impacts that continue today, challenged the domestic incident 

response structure under HSPD-5 and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan to an unprecedented extent. The pace of events is reflected in publication of this 

edition not quite a year after the 2010 edition. That tempo and the rapid evolution of authorities that 

shape DOPLAW have also increased demand, resulting in CLAMO distributing over 2,000 copies 

of the Handbook since 2009. 

What all DOMOPS contingencies have in common is that each is unique in some or many respects. 

What DOMOPS contingencies and DOPLAW have in common is that no other activity in which 

members of the military legal community engage so reflects the constitutionally-based character 

and structure of the nation we serve. The Department of Homeland Security’s National Response 

Framework, which superseded the National Response Plan, DoD authorities and policies regarding 

defense support of civil authorities, and other DOMOPS authorities, policies, and doctrine reflect 

fundamental principles of federalism by establishing protocols that place the Federal government in 

a supporting role to State and local authorities for most response contingencies. 

The nature, scope, and complexity of particular contingencies drive who leads and who supports, 

who has the right or best tools, who has enough of the right resources, and whose authorities will 

best support the decision maker and responder. Whether the DOMOPS issue for the judge advocate 

on the ground involves the Posse Comitatus Act, DoD support to counter-drug operations or 

National Security Special Events, how best a Defense Coordinating Officer can facilitate DoD 

support to a FEMA-led response to a major disaster or emergency, or an agency’s specific use of 

force policy, DOPLAW issues arise in every contingency. 

Today, we understand that the instruments of national power that reside in the five armed forces 

cannot invariably solve every crisis, or may not be available always to the degree they may be 

needed. We understand that some institutions, like the National Guard, remain an essential element 

of national and State response. We understand that the civilian agencies of the Federal government 

provide essential expertise, capacity, and authorities. We understand that the private sector, 

reflecting the wealth, innovation, diversity, and depth of America, is unequalled in its potential. We 

understand that every Federal response must take account of, partner with, and respect State and 

local authorities. And we understand that individual Americans are resilient, resourceful, and 

reliable partners in every response—they will invariably go where they are needed most and, when 

they are survivors, they are truly the first responders. 

There are overarching principles that apply to DOPLAW. First, every opinion and action must be 

consistent with the Constitution, the system of government it prescribes, and the prerogatives, 

responsibilities, and constraints that flow from it to Federal and State government. Second, we 

function best when we understand each other and the authorities we bring with us, regardless of the 

uniform, emblem, or overalls we wear. The invitation to me to write this preface, as a 

representative of a sister service and one of DoD’s many partner agencies, reflects that principle. 

Third, and especially in the midst of crisis, we must ensure that timely, actionable legal advice is 

provided to support decision makers and responders. 

Preface ii 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

The Principles of Coast Guard Operations, adapted to DOPLAW and incorporating these 

overarching principles, provide useful guidance to DOPLAW judge advocates and other lawyers, 

and those who support them: 

•	 Clear Objective: Understand the mission overall and the legal task at hand, remembering 

that legal counsel should drive to a desirable and desired outcome that supports the mission 

and is consistent with the Constitution and key authorities and policies; 

•	 Effective Presence: Be active and not passive, providing actionable legal advice on time, 

advice that’s right and precise at the place it’s needed most, and remembering that there is 

no substitute for physical presence at the point of decision; 

•	 Unity of Effort: Integrate the authorities, capabilities, and perspectives of all partners, 

frequently assembling and relying on diverse legal teams and the power of collaboration, 

and helping decision makers understand that sometimes there is greater strength in unity of 

effort than unity of command; 

•	 On-Scene Initiative: Act deliberately and decisively when recourse to remote senior counsel 

is not possible; 

•	 Flexibility: Adjust past experience, knowledge, and abilities to the contingency at hand, 

remembering that rapid linear or parallel change in the character and demands of a response 

is the rule and not the exception; 

•	 Managed risk: Base advice on the best facts and law available, accepting legal risk to 

achieve the mission without placing the decision maker or others in significant jeopardy, and 

remembering that the decision maker, not the attorney, decides with a sound understanding 

of the risks; 

•	 Restraint: Provide an accurate and honest appraisal of applicable law – even if it may 

constrain operations, providing advice that respects the role of other partners, and 

remembering to preserve and respect the civil liberties and dignity of Americans and others 

at all times. 

In the response to Deepwater Horizon, attorneys from throughout the Federal government advised 

decision makers and responders at all levels. Coast Guard judge advocates, civilian counsel, 

documentation specialists, and other professionals paced their incident commanders; documented 

the incident and preserved evidence for future investigation, prosecution, and litigation; participated 

in incident investigations and inquiries; were integral to litigation teams; and supported the National 

Incident Command, cabinet officials, and Congress. National Guard judge advocates helped State 

officials adapt to a response paradigm far different from the Stafford Act responses they were used 

to. Agency counsel huddled with principals in Washington D.C. and in regional offices to find 

solutions to novel problems. DOPLAW was practiced by lawyers in the White House as much as 

judge advocates in the parishes and counties or on the beaches, whether they knew it or not. In this 

response as in every other response since 2001, the DOPLAW Handbook has been an invaluable 

companion. Carry it. Read it. Apply it. Improve it. 

Cal Lederer 

July 29, 2011 

iii	 Preface 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Preface iv
 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 1 

OVERVIEW OF DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS 

A. Background 

Traditionally, the foremost task of the U.S. military has been to fight and win the nation’s wars.1 It 

has done so primarily by the projection of military power overseas. Since the terrorist attacks of 

September 11, 2001, however, the Department of Defense’s (DoD) highest priority has been the 

protection of the homeland from direct attack.2

 Additionally, the extraordinary destruction wrought 

by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 reminded us that threats to our homeland, people, property, and 

economy are not always the result of acts of man.3 

Since September 11, 2001, the federal government has taken aggressive and wide ranging steps to 

better address the threat of direct attacks on the United States and to prepare for and respond to the 

challenges of natural or manmade disasters. Through the Homeland Security Act of 2002,4 

Congress created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—an executive agency that 

consolidated the functions and responsibilities of more than a dozen federal agencies and 

departments, including the U.S. Coast Guard, the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA), the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Transportation Security Administration, 

and the Secret Service, among others.5 As required by law, DHS immediately began an effort to 

develop a coordinated system of response by civil authorities at all levels of government. The 

National Response Framework, published in January 2008, is the result of that effort.6 

In 2002, DoD created the first Combatant Command, U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM), 

with direct responsibility for the defense, protection and security of the continental United States, 

Alaska, and the territorial waters including the Gulf of Mexico and the Straits of Florida. In 

conjunction with U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM) and U.S. Southern Command 

(USSOUTHCOM), DoD now has Combatant Commands whose combined geographic 

responsibilities cover all States and territories of the United States. In June 2005, DoD published 

the Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support, setting out DoD’s vision for transforming 

homeland defense and support to civil authorities.7 

1

 National Military Strategy, p. 3, 2004, available at http://www. 

http://www.defense.gov/news/Mar2005/d20050318nms.pdf [hereinafter National Military Strategy]. 2

 Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support, Foreward, June 2005, available at 

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2005/d20050630homeland.pdf. 3

 Federal analysis indicates that the direct toll in lives and treasure from natural disasters in recent decades far 

outweighs that from terrorist attacks. See Financing Recovery from Large-Scale Natural Disasters, CRS, February 9, 

2009; 9/11 Terrorism: Economic Global Costs, CRS, October 5, 2004. 

4

 Homeland Security Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002) (codified primarily at 6 U.S.C. §§ 101– 

557) [hereinafter HSA 2002]. 

5 Id. 6 DEP’T OF HOMELAND SECURITY, NATIONAL RESPONSE FRAMEWORK, Jan. 2008[hereinafter NRF], available at 

http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf,or DOPLAW Handbook, Supp. App. 2-18. The NRF superseded the National 

Response Plan (NRP) published in 2005. 

7 See Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support, supra note 2, Foreword, p. iii. 

Chapter 1 

1 Overview of Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

B. Purpose of This Handbook 

DoD organized its mission of homeland defense and civil support into three complimentary 

categories: Lead, Support, and Enable.8

 “Lead” refers to DoD’s mission to “dissuade, deter, and 

defeat attacks upon the United States.”9 “Support” reflects DoD’s mission to assist civil authorities 

in recovering from an attack or disaster.10 And, “Enable” sets out DoD’s mission to improve the 

“security contributions of domestic and international partners” and its own capabilities.11 While 

each represents a distinct category of activities contained in the Strategy for Homeland Defense and 

Civil Support, the functions performed within the categories act in concert to strengthen the nation, 

prepare for any incident, defend against any attack, and recover from any disaster. 

This handbook focuses on the latter two categories, Support and Enable. Circumstances involving 

the exercise of homeland defense (HD) authority and capabilities, i.e. “dissuade, deter, and defeat,” 

are beyond the scope of this handbook. Nevertheless, actions taken within the HD function may 

directly impact DoD’s civil support (CS) mission once an event has occurred. Likewise, for 

ongoing events or continuing attacks, CS actions may contribute immediately to HD capabilities. 

C. DoD’s Role in Civil Support 

Military civil support operations are neither new nor limited to a single service. The military has 

long provided assistance in times of disaster and has routinely provided support to state and 

territorial governors, even historically having administered governmental affairs until local 

governance was established.12 During the final year of the Civil War, Army officers provided 

disaster relief through the Freedman’s Bureau.13 In the late Nineteenth Century, the Army played a 

direct role in many disaster relief operations including the great Chicago fire, the Johnstown Flood, 

and the Charleston, South Carolina earthquake. Similar support continued throughout the 

Twentieth Century to the present. 

National Guard (NG) units, under the control of their respective state governor and their “The 

Adjutants General” (TAGs),14 have traditionally been the primary military responders in domestic 

operations and emergencies. The use of federal forces to support state and local governments was, 

and remains, the exception rather than the rule. Federal forces are generally used only after state 

resources are exhausted or overwhelmed and federal assistance has been requested by state officials. 

DOD has capabilities and resources uniquely suited to support U.S. civil authorities. DoD consists 

of trained, disciplined personnel, and organizations capable of rapidly responding on short notice to 

8 Id. at 2. 9 Id. 10 Id. 11 Id. 12 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, FIELD MANUAL 3-07 STABILITY OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT OPERATIONS, 6-1 (20 February
 

2003) [hereinafter FM 3-07]. This publication supersedes FM 100-20/AF Pam 3-20; 5 December 1990, FM 100-23;
 

December 1994, FM 90-29; 17 October 1994, and FM 100-19/FMFM 7-10; July 1993. 13 U.S. Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands.
 

14 In “state status,” National Guard personnel are under the control of the particular Governor and TAG. “State status” 

includes “state active duty (SAD)” and Title 32—traditional Guard status. See infra Chapter 10, Reserve Components – 

Special Issues, for further discussion of National Guard status. 

Chapter 1 

Overview of Domestic Support Operations 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

a broad spectrum of emergencies. Military personnel and their associated equipment, although 

organized to conduct combat operations, can often be effectively employed in civil support 

operations. Consequently, DoD will continue to be called upon to assist civil authorities.15 In these 

instances, DoD’s role is one of support—civilian authorities retain primary responsibility for 

domestic operations.

16 

U.S. domestic law, Presidential Decision Directives (PDDs),17 National Security Presidential 

Directives (NSPD) and Homeland Security Presidential Directives (HSPDs), 18 Presidential Policy 

Directives (PPDs),19 Executive Orders (EOs), and DoD regulations provide the framework for, and 

set limits on, the use of military forces to assist civil authorities. While the types of domestic 

support operations vary widely, two forms of statutory restrictions as well as policy concerns may 

limit the scope of support. First, judge advocates must carefully consider whether the Posse 

Comitatus Act.20 Second, fiscal law constraints21—as well as policy limitations—apply when 

reviewing a proposed domestic support operation. 

While HD authority and capabilities are beyond the scope of this publication, it is important to 

recognize how DoD contributes to this larger strategic construct in addition to providing necessary 

civil support. 

On September 11, 2003, U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) reached full operational 

capability. USNORTHCOM’s current mission statement states: 

USNORTHCOM anticipates and conducts Homeland Defense and Civil Support 

operations within the assigned area of responsibility to defend, protect[,] and secure 

the United States and its interests.22 

This mission statement recognizes the unique dual roles for USNORTHCOM in HD and CS, in 

addition to standard Geographic Combatant Commander-assigned responsibilities.23 Because of 

USNORTHCOM’s responsibility for operations in the homeland, USNORTHCOM is engaged in 

nearly constant liaison with our national leadership and with the federal agencies that would lead 

civil support operations. 

15 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.18, DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL (29 DEC 10) [hereinafter DoDD 3025.18]. 16 See Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support, supra note 2, Executive Summary, p. 2. 

17 The Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) series is the mechanism used by the Clinton Administration to
 

promulgate Presidential decisions on national security matters. 

18 In the George W. Bush administration, the directives used to promulgate Presidential decisions on national security
 

matters are designated National Security Presidential Directives (NSPDs) and those on homeland security matters are 

designated Homeland Security Presidential Directives (HSPDs). Unless otherwise indicated, past directives of previous 

administrations remain in effect until superseded. 

19 The Presidential Policy Directive (PPD) series is a mechanism that the Obama administration uses to promulgate
 

Presidential decisions on national security matters. 

20 18 U.S.C. § 1385. See infra Chapter 4. 21 See infra Chapter 13. 

22 The geographic area of responsibility for USNORTHCOM also contains Mexico, Canada, Bermuda, and portions of 

the Caribbean. The exact dimensions of this geographic area are contained in the Unified Command Plan. 23 Duties and assignments for Combatant Commanders are contained in the Unified Command Plan. 

Chapter 1 

3 Overview of Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Acknowledging the value of civil support that DoD can offer, Congress has enacted laws allowing 

federal agencies to request support from the military during domestic operations. These laws 

emphasize DoD’s supporting role in civil support operations. Further, these laws acknowledge that 

the National Guard, while in state status, has primary responsibility for providing initial support to 

state and local civil authorities.24 

When federal forces respond in a support role, they operate under the direction of a designated lead 

federal agency (LFA). Federal laws recognize the importance of interdepartmental and interagency 

coordination and planning in this area. For example, the National Response Framework (NRF)25 is 

designed to maximize unity of effort when federal agencies work together to respond to domestic 

emergencies. 

In summary, DoD provides federal military assistance only when civil resources are insufficient, 

when requested to do so by appropriate civil authorities, and when properly ordered to do so by 

DoD officials. In domestic operations, National Guard units and personnel, in non-federal status26 

and under the command of their respective Governors, have primary responsibility for providing 

military assistance to local governments. Only when state and local government resources are 

exhausted or inadequate, and support is requested by the state, will the federal government provide 

the necessary support. 

D. Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA)27 

The primary reference for all DoD support to domestic operations is DoD Directive (DoDD) 

3025.18, Defense Support of Civil Authorities.

28 As seen in Figure 1-1, this umbrella directive 

governs provisions of all DoD military assistance to U.S. civil authorities, and it encompasses a 

variety of specific types of support.29 

24 FM 3-07, supra note 12, 6-14. 

25 National Response Framework, supra note 6.
 26 See infra Chapter 10, Reserve Components - Special Issues, for further discussion of National Guard status.
 27 MACA and MSCA now come under the term Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) in the National 

Response Framework (NRF). See National Response Framework, supra note 6. 28 DoDD 3025.18, supra note 15. 

29 The types of military support to domestic operations include defense support of civil authorities (DSCA), military 

assistance for civil disturbances (MACDIS), continuity of operations plan (COOP), sensitive support (SS), counterdrug
 

(CD), counter-terrorism (CT) and consequence management (CM).
 

Chapter 1 

Overview of Domestic Support Operations 4 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

D efen se Suppor t of C ivil A uthorities (DSC A) 

D SC A 

U m bre lla Policy

D OD D 3025. 18 

Sen sit ive 

Su pp ort

DO DD S-5 21 0.3 6 

Cou nt er Dru g

C JC SI 3 71 0.0 1 A 

CB RNE 

Ch em , Biologic a l, Ra diol. ,

Nu cl ea r, Hi gh -Yi e ld Ex pl.

D OD I 20 00 .1 8 

M ACDIS 

Mi lit ary Ass ist anc e for

Ci vil D is turb anc e

DO DD 30 25 .1 2 

Figure 1-1. Defense Support of Civil Authorities 

DoDD 3025.18 was promulgated on December 29, 2010. DoDD 3025.18 incorporates and cancels 

DoDD 3025.1 (Military Support to Civil Authorities) and DoDD 3025.15 (Military Assistance to 

Civil Authorities) and supplements DoDD 5525.5 (DoD Cooperation with Civilian Law 

Enforcement Officials). Notably, DoDD 3025.18 states that DSCA plans shall be compatible with 

the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and will consider command and control options 

that emphasize “unity of effort.” 

DoDD 3025.18 provides criteria against which all requests for support must be evaluated. The 

criteria are addressed to approval authorities, but commanders at all levels should be cognizant of 

these requirements when forwarding a recommendation for military support through the chain of 

command. The criteria are: 

• Legality – Compliance with the law. 

• Lethality – Potential use of lethal force by or against DoD forces. 

• Risk – Safety of DoD forces. 

• Cost – Who pays and the impact on DoD budget. 

• Appropriateness – Whether it is in the interest of DoD to provide the requested support. 

• Readiness – Impact on DoD’s ability to perform its primary mission. 

DoDD 3025.18 also outlines the roles and responsibilities of each DoD component and establishes 

request procedures and approval authorities for each type of domestic support operation. The 

Secretary of Defense has reserved approval authority of DoD support for civil disturbances and for 

responses to acts of terrorism. The various types of domestic support authorities are covered in 

more detail in specific Directives and Instructions set out in this Handbook’s respective chapters. 

Chapter 1 

5 Overview of Domestic Support Operations 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

E. Handbook Organization 

The phrase “domestic support operations” covers a broad category of DoD operations within the 

United States. This handbook will address all aspects of DoD’s civil support mission. However, in 

order to understand the context of that support, it is necessary to begin with an appreciation of the 

Federal government’s approach in preparing for and responding to any major domestic emergency 

or disaster, whether the result of a terrorist attack, an industrial accident, or the forces of nature. 

We begin that discussion in this handbook with an explanation of the National Security Strategy and 

its implementation by key federal agencies. In particular, chapter 3 provides an initial discussion of 

the National Response Framework and the Department of Homeland Security since, in the majority 

of emergency and disaster response operations, it will serve as the LFA to which DoD lends its 

support. From there, the handbook covers DoD’s strategy for civil support, and then chapter by 

chapter, discusses DoD’s role in the various forms of domestic support operations. 

Each chapter stands on its own and can be used by judge advocates to develop an understanding of 

specific types of operations, authorities, and limitations. However, each chapter is best understood 

in the context of the other chapters. Consequently, the handbook is organized in a manner so that 

the chapters relate to one another. Chapter 3, the National Plan for Consequence Management, 

leads into chapter 4, CBRNE Consequence Management, covering DoD’s capabilities, organization, 

and authority to respond to a CBRNE event of any origination. Likewise, chapter 4 relates to 

chapters 5 & 6, Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement, and Military Assistance for Civil 

Disturbances, operations and consequences likely to flow from a major CBRNE event, etc. The 

handbook concludes with chapters that impact all domestic operations, intelligence law, rules for 

the use of force, and fiscal law. 

Chapter 1 

Overview of Domestic Support Operations 6 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 2 

NATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR INCIDENT MANAGEMENT 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. § 5121, et 

seq., as amended. 

•	 Homeland Security Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002) as amended. 

•	 Pollution Control Act of Oct. 18, 1972, as amended, and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (1991), 

as amended. 

•	 Executive Order 12241 – National Contingency Plan (1980), as amended. 

•	 Executive Order 12472 – Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness 

Telecommunications Functions (1984), as amended. 

•	 Executive Order 12580 – Superfund Implementation (1987), as amended. 

•	 Executive Order 12656 – Assignment of Emergency Preparedness (1988) Responsibilities, 

(1988), as amended. 

•	 Executive Order 12657 – Federal Emergency Management Agency Assistance in Emergency 

Preparedness Planning at Commercial Nuclear Power Plants (1988), as amended. 

•	 Executive Order 12777 – Implementation of Section 311 of the Federal Water. 

•	 Executive Order 13286 – Amendment of Executive Orders, and Other Actions, in Connection 

with the Transfer of Certain Functions to the Secretary of Homeland Security (2003). 

•	 HSPD 15/NSPD 46 – U.S. Strategy and Policy in the War on Terror (classified directive), 

March 6, 2006. 

•	 PDD 63 – Critical Infrastructure Protection, May 22, 1998.1 

•	 HSPD 5 – Management of Domestic Incidents, February 28, 2003. 

•	 HSPD 7 – Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection, December 17, 

2003. 

•	 HSPD 8 – National Preparedness, December 17, 2003 and HSPD 8, Annex I – National 

Planning.2 

•	 PPD 8 – National Preparedness, March 30, 2011. 

•	 42 U.S.C. § 9605 – National Contingency Plan. 

•	 50 U.S.C. § 2061, et seq. – Defense Production Act of 1950. 

•	 DoDD 3025.18, Defense Support of Civil Authorities, December 29, 2010. 

•	 DoD 3025.1-M, Manual for Civil Emergencies. 

•	 National Response Framework (NRF), January 2008 

•	 National Incident Management System (NIMS). 

•	 National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. 

•	 FM 3-28, Civil Support Operations, September 2, 2010. 

1

 Recommended for historical reference. President Bush promulgated HSPD 7 to update and supersede the pre-9/11 

PDD-63 dealing with the protection of critical infrastructure. 

2 Recommended for historical reference. President Obama promulgated PPD-8 to update and supersede HSPD 8 and 

HSPD 8, Annex I, with the exception of paragraph 44 of HSPD-8 Annex I which remains in effect. Individual plans 

developed under HSPD-8 and HSPD-8 Annex I remain in effect unless otherwise replaced or rescinded. 

Chapter 2 

7 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

A. The Federal Response Structure 

In the two decades that began in 1988 when President George H.W. Bush promulgated Executive 

Order (EO) 12656, through March 2008 and the implementation of the National Response 

Framework, the Federal Government significantly changed its approach to preventing, preparing 

for, and responding to a major domestic incident. The changes came in fits and starts; at times they 

were incremental, at others, monumental. This chapter addresses the Federal Government’s current 

system for domestic all-hazard incident management, as well as the vital role of the Stafford Act as 

the primary authority for the use of federal resources to assist States and local governments. 

1. HSPD-5 

Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 (HSPD-5), “Management of Domestic Incidents,” 

established a new means to federal emergency management.3

 It centers on the practical necessity 

that all levels of government across the nation have a single, unified approach toward managing 

domestic incidents. Pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, HSPD-5 tasked the Secretary 

of Homeland Security to develop and administer a National Response Plan (subsequently, the 

National Response Framework (NRF)) that would integrate federal government domestic 

prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery plans into one all-discipline, all-hazards plan. It 

also tasked the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and administer a National Incident 

Management System (NIMS) that would unify federal, state, and local government capabilities to 

work together to prepare for, respond to, and recover from domestic events regardless of cause, size, 

or complexity. The intent of the NRF and NIMS is to provide the structure and mechanisms for 

establishing national level policy and operational direction regarding federal support to state and 

local incident managers. 

HSPD-5 also reaffirmed the Secretary of Homeland Security’s responsibility as the principal federal 

official (PFO) for domestic incident management. HSPD-5 tasked the Secretary of Homeland 

Security with coordinating the federal government’s resources in response to, or recovery from, 

terrorist attacks, major disasters, or other emergencies. This coordination responsibility exists when 

any one of the following four conditions applies: (1) a federal department or agency acting under its 

own authority has requested the assistance of the Secretary; (2) the resources of state and local 

authorities are overwhelmed and federal assistance has been requested by the appropriate state and 

local authorities; (3) more than one federal department or agency has become substantially involved 

in responding to the incident; or (4) the Secretary has been directed by the President to assume 

responsibility for managing the domestic incident.4

 Table 2-1 summarizes the roles and 

responsibilities established by HSDP-5. 

HSPD-5 also eliminates the previous distinction, established in PDD-39, between crisis 

management and consequence management, instead treating the two “as a single, integrated 

function, rather than as two separate functions.”5

 Whereas under the old Federal Response Plan 

(FRP) the Attorney General was the overall lead federal official for the government’s response until 

the crisis management phase of the response was over; now, under the NRF, the Secretary of 

3

 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5, Management of Domestic Incidents, February 28, 2003. 

4 Id. 5 Id. 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 8 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011
 

Homeland Security remains the lead federal official for the duration of the period involving federal 

assistance. Despite HSPD-5 erasing the distinction between crisis management and consequence 

management, the Directive reaffirms the Attorney General’s authority as the lead official for 

conducting criminal investigation of terrorist acts or terrorist threats.6 

Departments & Agencies Roles and Responsibilities Established by HSDP-5 

Federal Government 

Sec. 3. Declares that U.S. Government policy is to treat crisis management and 

consequence management as a single, integrated function, rather than as two 

separate functions. 

Secretary of Homeland 

Security 

Sec. 4. Assigns Secretary of Homeland Security responsibility for coordinating 

federal operations within the U.S. to prepare for, respond to, and recover from 

terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. 

Sec. 15. Tasks the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and administer a 

National Incident Management System (NIMS). 

Sec. 16. Tasks the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and administer a 

National Response Plan, or NRP (subsequently titled NRF). 

Attorney General Sec. 8. Reaffirms the Attorney General’s role as having lead responsibility for 

criminal investigations of terrorist acts or terrorist threats. 

Table 2-1. Roles and Responsibilities Established by HSPD-5. 

2. PPD-8 and National Preparedness Guidelines 

On March 30, 2011, President Obama promulgated PPD-8 to update and replace HPSD-8 “National 

Preparedness.” Separately, PPD-8 complements HSPD-5—which remains in effect. The purpose 

of PPD-8 is described as: 

strengthening the security and resilience of the United States through systematic 

preparation for the threats that pose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation, 

including acts of terrorism, cyber attacks, pandemics, and catastrophic natural 

disasters. Our national preparedness is the shared responsibility of all levels of 

government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and individual citizens.7 

PPD-8 specifies that the Secretary of Homeland Security is responsible for coordinating the 

domestic all-hazards preparedness efforts of all executive departments and agencies, in consultation 

with State, local, tribal, and territorial governments, nongovernmental organizations, private-sector 

partners, and the general public; and for developing the national preparedness goal. The directive 

further states that the heads of all executive departments and agencies with roles in prevention, 

protection, mitigation, response, and recovery are responsible for national preparedness efforts, 

including department-specific operational plans, as needed, consistent with their statutory roles and 

responsibilities. PPD-8 also specifies that nothing in the directive shall limit the authority of the 

Secretary of Defense with regard to the command and control, planning, organization, equipment, 

training, exercises, employment, or other activities of DoD forces, or the allocation of DoD 

8 resources.

6 Id. 

7

 PPD-8, National Preparedness, March 30, 2011. 

8 Id. 

Chapter 2
 

9 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

3. Executive Order 12656: Emergency Preparedness and Response Responsibilities 

Executive Order 12656 assigns national security emergency preparedness responsibilities to federal 

departments and agencies, delegating to the Department of Homeland Security primary 

responsibility for coordinating the efforts of, among other things, federal emergency assistance.9 

This executive order identifies several departments/agencies, e.g., Defense, Energy, Health and 

Human Services, that have an active, and potentially overlapping, role regarding nuclear, biological, 

and chemical (NBC) assessment and response. It also identifies primary and support functions to be 

performed during any national security emergency of the United States; development of plans for 

performing these functions; and development of the capability to execute those plans. As part of 

preparedness, EO 12656 mandates that the heads of federal agencies plan for continuity of 

government in the event of a national security emergency and plan for the mobilization of agency 

alternative resources. In assigning areas of responsibility for domestic preparedness, EO 12656 

provides the foundation for the former Federal Response Plan. 

The Executive Order establishing the Office of Homeland Security10 amended EO 12656 to account 

for the responsibilities of the new office within the functional and legal structure of emergency 

preparedness. This Executive Order identifies primary and support functions to be performed 

during any national security emergency of the United States, development of plans for performing 

these functions, and development of the capability to execute those plans. Table 2-2 highlights 

some of the major areas of responsibility for several of the agencies identified in EO 12656, as 

amended by EO 13286.11 

9 Exec. Order No. 12656, 3 C.F.R. 585 (1988); see also Exec. Order No. 12148, 3 C.F.R. 412 (1979), which transferred
 

to FEMA responsibility for coordinating federal response to civil emergencies at the regional and national levels. 

10 Exec. Order No. 13228, 66 Fed. Reg. 51812 (Oct. 10, 2001). 11 Exec. Order No. 13286, 68 Fed. Reg. 10619 (Mar. 5, 2003) transferred key functions of FEMA to DHS. 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 10 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011
 

AGENCY LIST OF SELECT AGENCY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Lead Responsibilities: Ensure continuation of agricultural production, food processing, 

storage, and distribution; oversee use and handling of agricultural commodities and land 

exposed to or affected by hazardous agents. 

Support Responsibilities: Assist Secretary of Defense in formulating and carrying out 

plans for stockpiling strategic and critical agricultural materials. 

Department of 

Defense 

Lead Responsibilities: Military response; national mobilization; damage assessment; 

support to civil and private sector, including law enforcement within authority; respond 

to all hazards related to nuclear weapons, materials, and devices; stockpile and store 

critical materials. 

Support Responsibilities: Coordinate military support with civilian agencies. 

Department of 

Energy 

Lead Responsibilities: Identify, analyze, assess, and mitigate hazards from nuclear 

weapons, materials, and devices; all emergency response activities pertaining to DOE 

nuclear facilities, to include recapture of special nuclear materials. 

Support Responsibilities: Advise, assist, and assess the radiological impact associated 

with national security emergencies. 

Department of Health 

and Human Services 

Lead Responsibilities: Mobilize health industry and allocate resources to provide health, 

mental health, and medical services to civilian and military claimants; reduce or 

eliminate adverse health and mental health effects produced by hazardous agents; 

provide emergency services, e.g. social services, family reunification, mortuary services. 

Support Responsibilities: Support Secretary of Agriculture to develop plans related to 

national security agricultural health services. 

Department of 

Homeland Security 

Lead Responsibilities: Advise National Security Council on issues of national security 

emergency preparedness, including mobilization preparedness, civil defense, continuity 

of government, technological disasters; coordinate with the other agencies and with state 

and local governments to implement national security emergency preparedness policies. 

Support Responsibilities: Prepare plans and programs, to include plans and capabilities 

for related to nuclear emergencies; promote programs for Federal buildings and 

installations. 

Department of Justice 

Lead Responsibilities: Interdict and respond to terrorism incidents; advise the President 

regarding national security emergency powers, plans, and authorities; coordinate 

domestic law enforcement activities related to national security emergency preparedness, 

respond to civil disturbances that may result in a national security emergency. 

Support Responsibilities: Intelligence community in the planning of its counterintelligence and counter-terrorism programs. 

Department of 

Transportation 

Lead Responsibilities: Meet essential transportation needs; provide direction to all modes 

of civil transportation; coordinate with state and local agencies in the management of all 

publicly-owned highways, roads, bridges, tunnels; assist with maritime and port control. 

Support Responsibilities: Assist Secretary of Energy to with transportation of energy 

materials. 

Table 2-2. Partial List of Agency Roles and Responsibilities during a National-Level Emergency. 

Chapter 2
 

11 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

4. The National Response Framework (NRF)12 

On March 22, 2008, the NRF became effective. The NRF superseded the National Response Plan. 

The NRF establishes a comprehensive, national, all-hazards approach to domestic incident 

management across a spectrum of activities. It organizes governmental response to natural and 

manmade disasters and incidents occurring in the United States, the District of Columbia, and U.S. 

territories and possessions. It addresses the principles, participants, roles, and structures of local, 

tribal, state, and federal governments—and each entity’s respective agencies. 

The NRF builds upon and complements the National Incident Management System (NIMS).13 The 

NIMS is a nationwide template enabling government and nongovernmental responders to respond 

to all domestic incidents. NIMS provides the structure and mechanisms for national-level policy 

and operational coordination for domestic incident management. NIMS does not alter or impede 

the ability of federal, state, local, or tribal departments and agencies to carry out their specific 

authorities. NIMS assumes that incidents are typically managed at the lowest possible jurisdictional 

and organizational levels, and in the smallest geographical areas feasible. 

a. NRF Organization 

The NRF is made up of the core document, fifteen Emergency Support Functions (ESFs), eight 

Support Annexes, seven Incident Annexes, and several Partner Guides. 

•	 Core Document. The Core Document describes the doctrine that guides national response, roles 

and responsibilities, response actions, response organizations, and planning requirements. 

•	 Emergency Support Function (ESF). The ESFs provide the necessary structures for 

coordinating interagency support in response to disasters and emergencies. ESFs describe the 

mission, policies, concept of operations, and responsibilities of the primary support agencies 

involved in the implementation of response functions. There are fifteen ESFs in the NRF (see 

Table 2-3). 

•	 Support Annexes. The eight support annexes describe essential supporting aspects that are 

overarching in nature and which apply to all types of incidents. They provide the roles and 

responsibilities for these supporting aspects. The support annexes are: critical infrastructure and 

key resources, financial management, international coordination, private-sector coordination, 

public affairs, tribal relations, volunteer and donations management, and worker safety and 

health. 

•	 Incident Annexes. The incident annexes describe the policies and structures to address specific 

situations. There are seven incident annexes: biological;14 catastrophic; cyber; food and 

agricultural; mass evacuation; and nuclear/radiological and terrorism.15 

12 A copy of the complete NRF is located at DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 2-18 or online at: 

http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/ (last visited Jun. 28, 2011). 13 National Incident Management System; http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/NIMS_core.pdf (last visited Jun.
 

28, 2011).
 14 HSPD-10 recommended a biological response annex be included as part of the NRP. This was subsequently
 

included in the NRF, titled Homeland Security Presidential Directive 10, “Biodefense for the 21st Century,” April 28, 

2004. 

15 Four of the seven Incident Annexes original to the NRP have been updated under the NRF. Two of the remaining 

annexes are still in effect; the third was replaced by ESF #10. An additional annex, “Mass Evacuation” was added in
 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 12 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 Partner Guides. The partner guides provide references for describing the key roles and actions 

for local, tribal, state, Federal, and private-sector response partners. 

b. Roles and Responsibilities 

The NRF specifies the roles and responsibilities of the following parties: 

•	 Local chief elected, or chief appointed official 

•	 Local emergency manager 

•	 Individuals and households 

•	 Private sector organizations and businesses 

•	 Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) 

•	 Tribal leader 

•	 Governor 

•	 Secretary of Homeland Security 

•	 Attorney General 

•	 Secretary of Defense 

•	 Secretary of State 

•	 Director of National Intelligence 

c. Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) 

The NRF establishes a coordination mechanism to provide assistance to state, local, and tribal 

governments and to federal departments and agencies conducting missions of primary federal 

responsibility. The ESFs may be selectively activated for both Stafford Act and non-Stafford Act 

incidents. Table 2-3 lists the ESFs and the designated lead federal agencies. 

June 2008. The current Incident Annexes can be found at DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 2-19 through 2-25, or 

online at: http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/incidentannexes.htm (last visited Jun. 28, 2011). 

Chapter 2 

13 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

ESF # ESF Lead Federal Agency 

1 Transportation Department of Transportation 

2 Communications Department of Homeland Security/National 

Communications System 

3 Public Works and Engineering Department of Defense/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

4 Firefighting Department of Agriculture 

5 Emergency Management Department of Homeland Security/FEMA 

6 Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, 

Housing, and Human Resources Department of Homeland Security/FEMA 

7 Logistics Management and 

Resource Support General Services Administration 

8 Public Health and Medical Services Department of Health and Human Services 

9 Urban Search and Rescue Department of Homeland Security/FEMA 

10 Oil and Hazardous Materials 

Response Environmental Protection Agency 

11 Agriculture and Natural Resources Department of Agriculture 

12 Energy Department of Energy 

13 Public Safety and Security Department of Justice 

14 Long Term Community Recovery 

and Mitigation Department of Homeland Security/FEMA 

15 External Affairs Department of Homeland Security 

Table 2-3. Emergency Support Functions Specified in the NRF. 

d. NRF Coordinating Structures 

The following are several of the key NRF coordinating structures used to manage declared 

emergencies or disasters. 

(1) Local/State Emergency Operations Center (EOC/SEOC). The location at which 

an effected municipal or state government coordinates the information and resources necessary to 

support the local or state incident management activities. 

(2) Incident Command Post (ICP). The field location at which the primary tacticallevel, on-scene incident command functions are performed. The ICP may be collocated with the 

incident base or other incident facilities and is normally identified by a green rotating or flashing 

light. 

(3) Area Command (Unified Area Command). An organization established to 

oversee the management of multiple incidents that are being handled by separate ICPs, or to oversee 

the management of a complex incident dispersed over a large area, and to broker critical resources. 

The Area Command does not have operational responsibility; that authority resides with the 

Incident Commander. The Area Command can become a Unified Area Command when incidents 

are multi-jurisdictional or involve multiple agencies. 

(4) National Operations Center (NOC). The NOC is the primary national hub for 

situational awareness and operational coordination across the Federal Government. The NOC is a 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 14 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

standing 24/7 interagency operations center that monitors threats and hazard information and fuses 

law enforcement, national intelligence, emergency response, and private-sector reporting. The 

NOC facilitates homeland security information-sharing and operational coordination with other 

federal, state, local, tribal, and nongovernmental EOCs. 

(5) National Response Coordination Center (NRCC). The NRCC is one of two 

operational components of the NOC. It is FEMA’s primary operations management center and the 

focal point for national resource coordination. The NRCC resolves federal resource support 

conflicts and other implementation issues forwarded by the Joint Field Office (JFO). 

(6) National Infrastructure Coordinating Center (NICC). The NICC monitors the 

Nation’s critical infrastructure and key resources on an ongoing basis. During an incident, the 

NICC provides a coordinating forum to share information across infrastructure and key resources 

sectors. 

(7) Strategic Information and Operations Center (SIOC). The FBI SIOC is the focal 

point and operational control center for all federal intelligence, law enforcement, and investigative 

law enforcement activities related to domestic terrorist incidents or credible threats, including 

leading attribution investigations. The SIOC serves as an information clearinghouse to help collect, 

process, vet, and disseminate information relevant to law enforcement and criminal investigation 

efforts in a timely manner. 

(8) Regional Response Coordination Center (RRCC). The RRCC is a 24/7 

coordination center operated by each of FEMA’s nine regions. The RRCC is capable of quick 

expansion through staffing ESFs in anticipation of, or immediately following, a serious incident. 

The RRCC coordinates federal regional response efforts, establishes federal priorities, and 

implements local federal program support. The RRCC operates until a JFO is established in the 

field and/or the Principal Federal Officer, Federal Coordinating Officer, or Federal Resource 

Coordinator can assume their NRF coordination responsibilities. 

(9) Joint Field Office (JFO). The JFO is the primary federal incident management 

field structure. It is a temporary federal facility established locally to coordinate operational federal 

assistance activities to the affected jurisdiction(s) during “Incidents of National Significance.” The 

JFO is a multi-agency center that provides a central location for coordination of federal, state, local, 

tribal, nongovernmental, and private-sector organizations with primary responsibility for threat 

response and incident support. The JFO adapts to the magnitude and complexity of the situation, 

and incorporates the NIMS principles regarding span of control and organizational structure: 

management, operations, planning, logistics, and finance/administration. Although the JFO uses an 

incident command system structure, the JFO does not manage on-scene operations. Instead, the 

JFO focuses on providing support to on-scene efforts and conducting broader support operations 

that may extend beyond the incident site. In the event of multiple incidents, multiple JFOs may be 

established at the discretion of the Secretary. 

(10) Joint Operations Center (JOC). When established, the JOC is a branch of the 

JFO. It is established by the Senior Federal Law Enforcement Officer (SFLEO) (e.g., the FBI 

Special Agent-in-Charge (SAC) during terrorist incidents) to coordinate and direct law enforcement 

and criminal investigation activities related to the incident. The emphasis of the JOC is on 

prevention as well as intelligence collection, investigation, and prosecution of a criminal act. This 

emphasis includes managing unique tactical issues inherent to a crisis situation (e.g., a hostage 

Chapter 2 

15 National Framework for Incident Management 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

situation or terrorist threat). When this branch is included as part of the JFO, it is responsible for 

coordinating the intelligence and information function (as described in NIMS) which includes 

information and operational security, and the collection, analysis, and distribution of all incidentrelated intelligence. Accordingly, the Intelligence Unit within the JOC serves as the interagency 

fusion center for all intelligence related to an incident. 

e. Federal Field-Level Organizations and Associated Federal Officers 

(1) JFO Coordination Group 

The following are potential members of the JFO Coordination Group: 

•	 Principal Federal Official (PFO). By law and by Presidential directive, the Secretary of 

Homeland Security is the PFO for coordination of all domestic incidents requiring multiagency 

federal response. The Secretary may elect to designate a single individual to serve as his or her 

primary representative to ensure consistency of federal support and the overall effectiveness of 

the federal incident management. When appointed, such an individual serves in the field as the 

PFO for the incident. The PFO provides a primary point of contact and situational awareness 

locally for the Secretary of Homeland Security. 

•	 Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO). The FCO is a senior FEMA official who manages and 

coordinates federal resource support activities related to Stafford Act disasters and emergencies. 

The FCO assists the Unified Command and/or the Area Command and works closely with the 

Principal Federal Official (PFO), Senior Federal Law Enforcement Official (SFLEO), and other 

Senior Federal Officials (SFOs). 

•	 Senior Federal Law Enforcement Official (SFLEO). The SFLEO is the senior law enforcement 

official from the agency with primary jurisdictional responsibility as directed by statute, 

Presidential directive, existing federal policies, and/or the Attorney General. The SFLEO 

directs the intelligence and investigative law enforcement operations related to the incident and 

supports the law enforcement component of the on-scene Unified Command. In the event of a 

terrorist incident, this official will normally be the FBI Senior Agent-in-Charge (SAC). 

•	 Federal Resource Coordinator (FRC). The FRC manages federal resource support activities 

related to non-Stafford Act incidents when federal-to-federal support is requested from DHS by 

another federal agency. The FRC is responsible for coordinating the timely delivery of 

resources to the requesting agency. 

•	 Governor’s Authorized Representative. The GAR, who is in most cases also the State 

Coordinating Officer (SCO), represents the governor of the state. The GAR/SCO is most often 

a senior leader in the state’s emergency response organization. Local area representatives may 

also be members of the JFO coordination group. 

(2) JFO Coordination Staff 

The JFO structure will normally include a Coordination Staff. The JFO Coordination Group 

determines the extent of this staffing based on the type and magnitude of the incident. The roles 

and responsibilities of the JFO Coordination Staff are summarized below: 

•	 Chief of Staff. The JFO Coordination Staff may include a Chief of Staff and representatives 

providing specialized assistance, which may include support in the following areas: safety; legal 

counsel; equal rights; security; infrastructure liaison; and other liaisons. 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 16 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 External Affairs Officer. The External Affairs Officer provides support to the JFO leadership in 

all functions involving communications with external audiences. External Affairs includes: 

Public Affairs, Community Relations, Congressional Affairs, State and Local Coordination, 

Tribal Affairs, and International Affairs, when appropriate. Resources for the various External 

Affairs Functions are coordinated through ESF #15. The External Affairs Officer is also 

responsible for overseeing operations of the Federal Joint Information Center (JIC) established 

to support the JFO. 

•	 Defense Coordinating Officer (DCO). If appointed by DoD, the DCO serves as DoD’s single 

point of contact at the JFO. With few exceptions, requests for Defense Support of Civil 

Authorities (DSCA) originating at the JFO will be coordinated with and processed through the 

DCO. The DCO may have a Defense Coordinating Element (DCE) consisting of a staff and 

military liaison officers in order to facilitate coordination and support to activated Emergency 

Support Functions (ESFs). Specific responsibilities of the DCO (subject to modification based 

on the situation) include processing requirements for military support, forwarding mission 

assignments to the appropriate military organizations through DoD-designated channels, and 

assigning military liaisons, as appropriate, to activated ESFs. Currently, DoD has assigned 

DCOs at each of the ten Department of Homeland Security/FEMA regions. (See Figure 2-1 

below.) 

Figure 2-1. Map of FEMA Regions with Embedded DCOs in Each Region.16 

f. Utilization of the NRF 

After the President has declared a major disaster or emergency, he may direct any federal agency to 

use its authorities and resources in support of state and local response efforts to the extent that 

provision of the support does not conflict with other agency emergency missions. Under the 

Stafford Act, FEMA serves as the lead federal agency (LFA) for disaster response and recovery 

activities. The authority to direct federal agencies to use their resources in support of state and local 

16 FEMA, Regional Contacts, http://www.fema.gov/about/contact/regions.shtm (last visited July 26, 2011). 

Chapter 2 

17 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

response efforts has been delegated from the President to the Secretary of DHS.17 Under the NRF, 

the President, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of DHS and the FEMA Administrator, can 

appoint a Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO)18 who is responsible for coordinating the delivery of 

federal assistance to the affected state(s) and local government(s) and any disaster victims. The 

FCO works closely with the SCO, appointed by the governor, to oversee disaster operations for the 

state. The SCO also serves as the Governor’s Authorized Representative (GAR) and is generally 

empowered to execute all necessary documents for disaster assistance on behalf of the state. 

5. The National Incident Management System (NIMS) 

Since it was first published, NIMS has subsequently been revised to reflect input from a broad 

variety of stakeholders (e.g., federal, state, tribal, local, private sector, and nongovernmental 

organizations).19 In addition, lessons learned from Katrina and other recent incidents were 

considered in the new version. The December 2008 revision “focused on clarifying concepts and 

principles, and refines processes and terminology throughout the document . . . no major policy 

changes were made to the document during the revision.”20 

NIMS is comprised of five key components: 

•	 Preparedness. NIMS focuses on the following elements of preparedness: planning; procedures 

and protocols; training and exercises; personnel qualifications and certification; and, equipment 

certification.21 NIMS also stresses a unified approach to management and response activities, 

and that all levels of governments and organizations must identify their capabilities before 

incidents occur. 

•	 Communication and Information Management. NIMS emphasizes that well-planned, 

established, and utilized communications are critical for enabling the dissemination of 

information during an incident.22 Common plans, standards and communication architecture 

help to facilitate interoperability and maintain a constant flow of information during an 

incident.23 As with incident response in general, communication systems should be flexible and 

scalable to effectively manage any situation. 

•	 Resource Management. According to NIMS, resource management is divided into five 

principles:24 

•	 Planning; 

•	 Use of agreements; 

•	 Categorizing resources; 

•	 Resource identification and ordering; and, 

•	 Effective management of resources. 

17 DEP’T OF HOMELAND SECURITY, NATIONAL RESPONSE FRAMEWORK, Jan. 2008 [hereinafter NRF]. 18 Id. at 67. 

19 NIMS can be viewed at http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/NIMS_core.pdf. 

20 Id. 21 Id. at 9. 22 Id. at 23. 

23 Id. at 24. 24 Id. at 32–33. 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 18 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 Command and Management. NIMS plans to incorporate the existing Incident Command 

System (ICS) and Multi-Agency Coordination Systems (MACS) as the command structure for 

response to all hazards at all levels of government.25 The ICS works at the tactical level, 

organizing the on-scene operations.26 In comparison, MACS coordinate activities above the 

field level and can be either informal or formal. Formal coordination addresses issues before an 

incident occurs and is the preferred process.27 

•	 Ongoing Management and Maintenance. HPSD-5 authorized the Secretary of Homeland 

Security to establish a mechanism to ensure the ongoing management and maintenance of 

NIMS. The National Integration Center (NIC) was established to assist government and private 

sectors in implementing NIMS and to provide for its refinement.28 As part of this process, 

NIMS notes the continued development of science and technology as playing a critical role in 

improving response capabilities. 

As with the Stafford Act, NIMS is based upon the premise that most incidents begin and end at the 

local level, and are managed on a daily basis at the lowest level.29 There are, however, incidents 

which require the involvement of higher levels of government and response. 

Like the Stafford Act and its progeny, the draft NIMS is based upon the premise that most incidents 

begin and end at the local level with few incidents requiring assistance from federal, state, and local 

authorities.30 

6. PPD-8, National Planning Replaces HSPD 8, Annex I. 

President Obama promulgated PPD-8 on March 30, 2011 to replace both HSPD-8 (discussed above) 

and HSPD-8, Annex I, National Planning, which was originally promulgated in 2007, to “further 

enhance the preparedness of the United States by formally establishing a standard and 

comprehensive approach to national planning.”31 Most notably, PPD-8 mandates: 

•	 SECDHS, in coordination with other executive departments and agencies, must develop and 

submit to the President a “National Preparedness Goal” by September 30, 2011. The 

National Preparedness Goal shall be informed by the risk of specific threats and 

vulnerabilities, accounting for regional variations, and shall include concrete, measurable 

and prioritized objectives to mitigate risks. It must also define core capabilities necessary to 

prepare for specific types of incidents that present the greatest risk to national security and 

must emphasize achievement of an integrated, layered and “all-of-Nation” preparedness 

approach to optimize available resources. 

•	 SECDHS, in coordination with other executive departments and agencies, shall submit to 

the President by November 30, 2011 a National Preparedness System consisting of an 

25 Id. at 45. 26 Id. at 46. 27 Id. at 64. 28 Id. at 75. 

29 Id. at 5. 

30 Id. at 17. 31 HSPD-8, Annex I (2007) Purpose. 

Chapter 2 

19 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

integrated set of guidance, programs, and processes that will enable the Nation to meet the 

National Preparedness Goal. The National Preparedness System shall be designed to help 

guide the domestic efforts of all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and 

the public to build and sustain the capabilities outlined in the National Preparedness Goal. 

The National Preparedness System shall include guidance for planning, organization, 

equipment, training, and exercises to build and maintain domestic capabilities. It shall 

provide an all-of-Nation approach for building and sustaining a cycle of preparedness 

activities over time. The National Preparedness System shall include a series of integrated 

national planning frameworks, covering prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and 

recovery. The frameworks shall be built upon scalable, flexible, and adaptable coordinating 

structures to align key roles and responsibilities to deliver the necessary capabilities. 

•	 Individual plans developed under HSPD-8 and Annex I remain in effect until rescinded or 

otherwise replaced. 

HSPD-8, Annex I required the development of National Planning Scenarios.32 Consequently, the 

Homeland Security Counsel developed fifteen scenarios depicting “a diverse set of highconsequence threat scenarios of both potential terrorist attacks and natural disasters.”33 

USNORTHCOM subsequently developed CONPLANs that address each of the scenarios where 

DoD support is necessary. These CONPLANs can be accessed with permission of 

USNORTHCOM.34 

32 HSPD 8, Annex I, para. 34.
 

33 In 2006, the Department of Homeland Security released National Planning Scenarios, an in-depth analysis of fifteen 

potential disasters that face the nation. 

Scenario 1: Nuclear Detonation – 10-kiloton Improvised Nuclear Device 

Scenario 2: Biological Attack – Aerosol Anthrax 

Scenario 3: Biological Disease Outbreak – Pandemic Influenza 

Scenario 4: Biological Attack – Plague 

Scenario 5: Chemical Attack – Blister Agent 

Scenario 6: Chemical Attack – Toxic Industrial Chemicals 

Scenario 7: Chemical Attack – Nerve Agent 

Scenario 8: Chemical Attack – Chlorine Tank Explosion 

Scenario 9: Natural Disaster – Major Earthquake 

Scenario 10: Natural Disaster – Major Hurricane 

Scenario 11: Radiological Attack – Radiological Dispersal Devices 

Scenario 12: Explosives Attack – Bombing Using Improvised Explosive Devices 

Scenario 13: Biological Attack – Food Contamination 

Scenario 14: Biological Attack – Foreign Animal Disease (Foot-and-Mouth Disease) 

Scenario 15: Cyber Attack 

See DEP’T OF HOMELAND SECURITY, NATIONAL PLANNING SCENARIOS (Apr. 2006). Two of the scenarios represent 

natural disasters, major earthquake and major hurricane; a third highlights economic and social complications resulting 

from a cyber attack; the remaining twelve scenarios focus on chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield 

explosive (CBRNE) incidents. 

34 USNORTHCOM CONPLANs remain in force and effect until rescinded or replaced as specified in PDD-8. 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 20 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

7. Interplay between the NRF and Other Plans Applicable to WMD Response and 

Recovery 

When DHS initiates the response mechanisms of the NRF, including the ESFs, Support Annexes, 

and Incident Annexes, the existing interagency plans that address incident management are 

incorporated as supporting plans and/or operational supplements to the NRF. For incidents not led 

by DHS, other federal agency response plans provide the primary federal response protocol. Other 

interagency response plans include the National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP)35 and 

the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).36 The NRF 

represents a significant effort to integrate the federal government’s inter-agency emergency and 

disaster plans and may affect certain agency’s responsibilities in the event of a major disaster or 

emergency. 

The NECP was developed pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 200237 to promote the ability 

of emergency response providers and relevant government officials to continue to communicate in 

the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, and to ensure, 

accelerate, and attain interoperable emergency communications nationwide.38 Emergency Support 

Function 2 of the NRF supplements the NECP and sets out procedures for coordinating the 

provision of temporary national security and emergency preparedness telecommunications support 

in areas impacted by a major disaster or emergency. 

The NCP was developed pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 

and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended.39 It sets out procedures for managing oil spills 

into navigable waters and releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants into the 

environment. Inland, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the lead agency for 

coordinating the federal response. In coastal areas, the U.S. Coast Guard is the lead agency for 

coordinating the federal response. Generally, DoD or Department of Energy (DOE) will be the lead 

agency for responding to the release of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants when the 

incident is on or comes from a facility or vessel under the control, custody, or jurisdiction of DoD 

or DOE, respectively. Finally, the EPA takes the lead for hazardous materials with respect to 

incidents that have not yet been determined to be related to terrorism, or for incidents when the 

NRF has not yet been activated. 

Once the NRF is activated, FEMA has the lead for incident management and EPA has the lead 

agency role for ESF 10, Oil and Hazardous Materials Response, incorporating the NCP. Executive 

35 National Emergency Communications Plan, July 2008. It serves as a basis of planning and use of national 

communications resources in support of Stafford Act provisions during a non-wartime emergency [hereinafter NECP]. 

36 National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, 40 C.F.R. 300 (2002) [hereinafter the National 

Contingency Plan or NCP]. The NCP provides the organizational structure and procedures for preparing for and
 

responding to discharges of oil and releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants. 

37 Homeland Security Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002) as amended [hereinafter Homeland
 

Security Act]. 

38 Id. at “Message from the Secretary.”
 39 42 U.S.C. § 9605, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), Pub. L. 99–
 

499, [hereinafter CERCLA] and by § 311(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. § 1321(d), as amended by the 

Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), Pub. L. No. 101–380. Executive Orders 12580 and 12777 delegated to the EPA 

responsibility to amend the NCP as necessary. 

Chapter 2 

21 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Order 12580 authorizes the establishment of the National Response Team (NRT) for planning and 

preparing for response actions; designates the EPA and the Coast Guard as co-chairs; and 

designates responsibilities of other agencies on the NRT and on Regional Response Teams.40 

The Nuclear/Radiological Incident Annex (NRIA) of the NRF supersedes the Federal Radiological 

Emergency Response Plan (FRERP) of 1996.41 The NRIA describes the policies, situations, 

concepts of operations, and responsibilities of the federal departments and agencies governing the 

immediate response and short-term recovery activities for incidents involving release of radioactive 

materials to address the consequences of the event. The incidents may result from inadvertent or 

deliberate acts. Pursuant to the incident annex paradigm, when DHS exercises domestic incident 

management functions, it is supported by other federal agencies that are either “coordinating” or 

“cooperating” agencies. 

“Coordinating agencies” provide the leadership, expertise, and authorities to implement critical and 

specific nuclear/radiological aspects of the response, and facilitate nuclear/radiological aspects of 

the response in accordance with those authorities and capabilities. The coordinating agencies are 

those federal agencies that own, have custody of, authorize, regulate, or are otherwise assigned 

responsibility for the nuclear/radioactive material, facility, or activity involved in the incident. 

“Cooperating agencies” include other federal agencies that provide additional technical and 

resource support specific to nuclear/radiological incidents to DHS and the coordinating agencies. 

When DHS is not exercising domestic incident management responsibilities, the coordinating 

agency, as determined by their authorities, will be the responsible agency. DoD is the coordinating 

agency for nuclear facilities owned or operated by DoD, materials shipped by or for DoD, nuclear 

weapons, and DOD satellites contain radioactive materials that impact within the United States.42 

National Security Presidential Directive 46 (NSPD-46)/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 

15 (HSPD-15)43 detail the policy of the United States in combating terrorism and reaffirm the lead 

agencies for the management of various aspects of the counterterrorism effort. They recognizes that 

states have primary responsibility in responding to terrorist incidents, including events, and the 

Federal Government provides assistance as required. 

8. Impact of the Homeland Security Act on the Federal Response Structure and Process 

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 represented a watershed in the manner in which the federal 

government organizes to respond to WMD terrorism.44 The Act established the DHS, and 

consolidated the consequence management missions, assets, and personnel of numerous federal 

departments and agencies into a single department.45 The primary missions of DHS include: 

preventing terrorist attacks within the United States; reducing the vulnerability of the United States 

40 Exec. Order No. 12580, (Superfund Implementation), 23 Jan. 1987, as amended. 41 Nuclear/Radiological Incident Annex, June 2008, p. 4. 

42 Id. Table 1. 43 National Security Presidential Directive 46/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 15, “U.S. Strategy and Policy 

in the War on Terror” (classified), March 6, 2006.
 44 Homeland Security Act, supra note 37.
 45 Id. § 101. 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 22 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

to terrorism; and minimizing the damage and assisting in the recovery from terrorist attacks that 

occur within the United States.46 DHS is comprised of various directorates and components 

including the Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, Citizenship and Immigration Services, 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maintains responsibility for “reduc[ing] the 

loss of life and property and protect[ing] the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, 

acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters.”47 Activities pursuant to this responsibility include 

managing the response; directing the strategic response assets that were transferred to DHS; 

overseeing the Metropolitan Medical Response System; and coordinating other federal response 

resources outside of DHS in the event of a terrorist attack or major disaster. The Homeland 

Security Act also directed the development of a National Incident Management System to integrate 

the federal, state, and local government response to terrorist attacks; and consolidate existing federal 

government emergency response plans into a single, coordinated National Response Plan.48 In sum, 

the Homeland Security Act served as the foundation for the government to reorganize and 

consolidate incident management functions, assets and personnel under a single federal agency. 

Further, it served as the legal impetus for a revised approach to incident management, as later set 

forth in Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5, discussed below. 

9. Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act 

Title 50 of Chapter 40 of the U.S. Code deals with the U.S. Government’s response to the 

proliferation of and use or threat to use nuclear, chemical, or biological WMD or related materials 

and technologies.49 Title 50 U.S.C. § 2313 directs the Secretary of Defense to designate an official 

within the DoD as Executive Agent to coordinate DoD assistance with federal, state, and local 

entities. The Secretary of Defense has appointed the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland 

Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs (ASD(HD&ASA)) as Executive Agent. The Department 

of Energy (DOE) is directed to designate an Executive Agent for its nuclear, chemical, and 

biological response. The DoD and DOE Executive Agents are responsible for coordinating 

assistance with federal, state, and local officials in responding to threats involving nuclear, 

chemical, and biological weapons.50 

B. The Stafford Act 

The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (The Stafford Act) provides 

for assistance by the federal government to the states in the event of natural and other disasters and 

emergencies.51 The Stafford Act is the primary legal authority for federal emergency and disaster 

assistance to state and local governments. Congress’ intent in passing the Stafford Act was to 

46 Id. § 101(b). 

47 FEMA mission as stated on the FEMA website located at: http://www.fema.gov/about/index.shtm#0 (last visited on
 

Jun. 28, 2011). 

48 Homeland Security Act, supra note 37, § 502. 

49 Title 10 U.S.C. §12304 provides the federal authority for the mobilization of Reserve Components in response to the 

use or threatened use of a weapon of mass destruction.
 50 50 U.S.C. §§ 2301–2369 (2006). 

51 The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. § 5121, et seq., as amended by
 

Pub. L. No. 109-295 (2007) [hereinafter The Stafford Act]. 

Chapter 2 

23 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

provide for an “orderly and continuing means of assistance by the federal government to state and 

local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to alleviate the suffering and damage which 

result from such disasters.”52 The Stafford Act sought, among other things, to broaden the scope of 

disaster relief programs; encourage the development of comprehensive disaster preparedness and 

assistance plans, programs, and capabilities of state and local governments; and provide federal 

assistance programs for both public and private losses sustained in disasters. 

Through the Stafford Act, Congress delegated to the President emergency powers he may exercise 

in the event of a major disaster or emergency. Generally, Stafford Act assistance is rendered upon 

request from a state governor53 provided certain conditions are met, primarily that the governor 

certifies that the state lacks the resources and capabilities to manage the consequences of the event 

without federal assistance. FEMA operates under the Stafford Act, focusing its efforts on managing 

the consequences of disasters and emergencies. FEMA’s actions generally are driven by requests 

from state and local governments. Figure 2-1, below, provides an overview of the process of 

providing federal support to states under the Stafford Act. 

Figure 2-1. 

52 Id. § 5121. 

53 Section 5170(a) of the Stafford Act was amended in 2006 authorizing the President, in the absence of a State request, 

to provide Federal assistance.
 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 24 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011
 

The Stafford Act lists the roles and responsibilities of federal agencies and departments in providing 

both major disaster and emergency assistance; the Stafford Act also outlines the types of assistance 

that affected state(s) may receive from the federal government. (See Table 2-4 below.) 

To coordinate the relief efforts of all federal agencies in both major disasters and emergencies, the 

Stafford Act authorizes the President to appoint a Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) immediately 

after declaring a major disaster or emergency. The Stafford Act also requires the President to 

request that a Governor seeking federal assistance designate a State Coordinating Officer (SCO) to 

coordinate state and local disaster assistance efforts with those of the federal government.54 The 

FCO may utilize relief organizations, such as state relief organizations and the American National 

Red Cross (ANRC), in the distribution of emergency supplies, such as food and medicine, and in 

reconstruction or restoration of essential services, e.g., housing. The FCO may coordinate all relief 

efforts; however, states, localities, and relief organizations must agree. The President is also 

authorized to form Emergency Support Teams (EST) of federal personnel to be deployed to the area 

of the disaster or emergency.55 By delegation, the FCO may activate ESTs composed of federal 

program and support personnel, to be deployed into an area affected by a major disaster or 

emergency.56 These teams may also be called Emergency Response Teams (ERTs). The ERT is 

the principal interagency group that supports the FCO in coordinating the overall federal disaster 

assistance. 

The Stafford Act applies in the event of a major disaster or emergency. It details the emergency functions of the 

President, which are delegated as per, among others, Executive Order 12656. 

DEPARTMENTS & AGENCIES ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 

Executive Office of the President 

(President or as delegated) 

Major Disaster Assistance—upon request of a state governor. Provide 

specified essential services; coordinate disaster relief activities; direct 

federal agency assistance to states and localities; take other action as 

consistent with the Act and within delegated authority. 

Emergency Assistance, upon request of a state governor or sua sponte: 

Direct federal agencies to provide resources and technical and advisory 

assistance; provide essential services; coordinate all disaster relief 

assistance. 

Federal Coordinating Officer Major Disaster and Emergency Assistance: Establish field offices; 

coordinate relief efforts; take other necessary actions within authority. 

Emergency Support Teams Assist the Federal Coordinating Officer in carrying out his or her 

responsibilities in a major disaster or emergency. 

State Governor(s) Request declaration by the President that a major disaster or emergency 

exists. 

Federal Agencies Provide consistent with appropriate authorities and upon request from the 

President: Personnel for the Emergency Support Teams; and, assistance in 

meeting immediate threats to life and property resulting from a major 

disaster or emergency. 

54 42 U.S.C. § 5143. 

55 Id. § 5144. 56 44 C.F.R. 206.24 (2003). 

Chapter 2
 

25 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

FEMA57 Prepare, sponsor, and direct federal response plans and programs for 

emergency preparedness; provide hazard mitigation assistance in the form 

of property acquisition & relocation assistance. 

Department of Defense Upon President’s direction, provide “emergency work” to protect life and 

property prior to declaration of major disaster or emergency. 

American National Red Cross 

and other relief organizations 

Major Disaster: As a condition of receiving assistance, comply with 

regulations relating to non-discrimination and other regulations as deemed 

necessary by the President for effective coordination of relief efforts. 

Table 2-4. Stafford Act Roles and Responsibilities. 

1. Requests for Emergency or Major Disaster Declarations 

Under the Stafford Act, the governor of an affected state may request the declaration of a major 

disaster or emergency, and must demonstrate, as a prerequisite for receiving assistance, both that the 

state’s response plans have been activated and that state and local capabilities are inadequate for an 

effective response. The Stafford Act’s definitions of “emergency” and “major disaster” are 

referenced in many of the legal documents related to incident management and are used consistently 

throughout this chapter. 

a. Major Disasters 

A “major disaster” is defined as follows: 

[A]ny natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind 

driven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, 

mudslide, snowstorm, or drought), or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or 

explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the determination of the 

President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major 

disaster assistance under this Act to supplement the efforts and available resources of 

States, local governments, and disaster relief organizations in alleviating the damage, 

loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby.58 

A major disaster encompasses fires, floods, and explosions, regardless of cause, when such acts 

cause damage of sufficient severity to warrant federal disaster assistance, as determined by the 

President. A WMD event involving fire or explosion, including the detonation of a high-yield 

explosive, would likely meet this threshold. Following the letter of the law strictly, a chemical, 

radiological, or biological WMD event in the United States would qualify as a major disaster, only 

if it results in a fire, flood, or explosion. A WMD event of catastrophic proportions could warrant 

treatment as both a major disaster and an emergency. 

Major disaster assistance is a more comprehensive grant of federal aid for long-term consequence 

management. In a major disaster, the President has broad authority to assist states and localities. 

To receive federal assistance, a governor must not only indicate to the President that the state does 

not have the capacity or resources to mount an effective response, but also furnish information on 

the measures that have been taken at the state and local levels to mitigate the effects of the disaster. 

57 Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-295 (2007), § 506. FEMA retained all 

functions assigned to it under the Stafford Act and remains the lead federal agency for Stafford Act responses. 58 42 U.S.C. § 5122(2). 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 26 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

In addition, the President must certify that state and local government obligations and expenditures 

comply with all applicable cost-sharing requirements of the Stafford Act.59 

The President’s powers after the declaration of a major disaster include the authority to provide the 

following, among others, to states and localities: specified technical and advisory assistance; 

temporary communications services; food; relocation assistance; legal services; crisis counseling 

assistance and training; unemployment assistance; emergency public transportation in the affected 

area; and fire management assistance on public or privately-owned forest or grassland.60 In 

addition, the President is authorized to direct federal agencies in providing essential assistance to 

meet immediate threats to life and property and to coordinate all disaster relief assistance.61 

b. Emergencies 

The Stafford Act defines “emergency” as follows: 

[A]ny occasion or instance for which, in the determination of the President, [f]ederal 

assistance is needed to supplement State and local efforts and capabilities to save 

lives and to protect property and public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the 

threat of a catastrophe in any part of the United States.62 

An emergency is, more broadly, any situation in which federal assistance is required to save lives, 

protect health and property, or mitigate or avert a catastrophe. Generally, the existence or threat of 

each type of WMD–chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high-yield explosive (CBRNE)– 

likely would be deemed an “emergency” if the event or threat overwhelms state and local 

authorities and warrants the assistance of the federal government. 

Emergency authority granted to the President is similar to that authorized for handling major 

disasters, but it is not as extensive. Emergency assistance is more limited in scope and in time, and 

total assistance may not exceed $5 million for a single emergency, unless the President determines 

there is a continuing and immediate risk to lives, property, public health or safety, and necessary 

assistance will not otherwise be provided on a timely basis.63 

In any emergency, the President may direct any federal agency, with or without reimbursement, to 

use the authorities and resources granted to it under federal law in support of state and local 

emergency assistance efforts to save lives, protect property and public health and safety, and lessen 

or avert the threat of a catastrophe.64 The President may coordinate all emergency relief assistance 

and provide technical and advisory assistance to affected state and local governments for: 

performance of essential community services; issuance of hazard and risk warnings; broadcast of 

public health and safety information; and management, control and reduction of immediate threats 

to public safety. The President may also direct federal agencies to provide emergency assistance; 

remove debris pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 5173; provide temporary housing assistance in accordance 

59 Id. § 5170. 60 See id. §§ 5171–5186. 61 Id. § 5170(b). 62 Id. § 5122(1). 

63 Id. § 5193. 64 Id. § 5192. 

Chapter 2 

27 National Framework for Incident Management 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

with 42 U.S.C. § 5174; and assist state and local governments in the distribution of food, medicine, 

and other consumable supplies.65 

The Stafford Act authorizes the President to declare an emergency, but not a major disaster, sua 

sponte with respect to an emergency that “involves a subject area for which, under the Constitution 

or laws of the United States, the United States exercises exclusive or preeminent responsibility and 

authority.”66 

The Stafford Act also authorizes the President, upon request from the governor of an affected state, 

to provide “emergency work” essential for the preservation of life and property, by DoD for a 

maximum of ten days before the declaration of either an emergency or a major disaster.67 

2. Liability under the Stafford Act 

The Stafford Act specifically provides for immunity from liability for certain actions taken by 

federal agencies or employees of the federal government pursuant to the Act. Section 5148 of the 

Stafford Act provides: 

The federal government shall not be liable for any claim based upon the exercise or 

performance of or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty 

on the part of a federal agency or an employee of the federal government in carrying 

out the provisions of this chapter. 

3. Main Takeaways concerning the Stafford Act 

First, response to a disaster or emergency is primarily the responsibility of the state and local 

governments. Second, if the state or local government is overwhelmed by the incident or there is an 

independent federal nexus to the event, the President may authorize major disaster assistance or 

declare a federal emergency, respectively. When an emergency involves a facility for which the 

federal government exercises exclusive or primary authority, the President may unilaterally direct 

the provision of federal assistance under the Act. Third, when a disaster or emergency overwhelms 

state and local capabilities, a governor may request the President to make a major disaster or 

emergency declaration under the Stafford Act. A presidential declaration is contingent on the joint 

findings of a local/state/DHS preliminary damage assessment, indicating that damages are of 

sufficient severity to warrant assistance under the Stafford Act.68 Finally, an incident of WMD 

terrorism is quite likely to be of sufficient severity to warrant an emergency declaration. 

C. Subordinate Commander’s Immediate Response Authority 

1. Federal Military Commanders 

Federal military commanders, heads of DoD Components, and/or responsible DOD civilian officials 

have “Immediate Response Authority” under DoDD 3025.18. In response to a request for 

65 Id. § 5192(a). 66 Id. § 5191(a). 

67 Id. § 5170b(c).
 68 NRF, supra note 14, Overview of Stafford Act Support to States, p. 1.
 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 28 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

assistance from a civil authority, under imminently serious conditions and if time does not permit 

approval from higher authority, DoD officials (most typically installation commanders) may 

provide an immediate response by temporarily employing the resources under their control, subject 

to any supplemental direction provided by higher headquarters, to save lives, prevent human 

suffering, or mitigate great property damage within the United States. 

•	 However, Immediate Response Authority does not allow for actions that would subject 

civilians to the use of military power that is regulatory, prescriptive, proscriptive, or 

compulsory (for a detailed discussion, see Chapter 4: Military Support to Civilian Law 

Enforcement and Chapter 5: Civil Disturbance Operations). 

•	 Separately, per DoDD 3025.18.4.G.1, any decision by an Immediate Response Authority to 

temporarily deploy resources requires notification to the National Joint Operations and 

Intelligence Center (NJOIC). 

•	 Finally, commanders may not normally continue support under immediate response 

authority beyond seventy-two hours. 

As noted in Chapter 1, all such requests from civil authorities for assistance must be evaluated for: 

•	 Legality (compliance with laws) 

•	 Lethality (potential use of lethal force by or against DOD Forces) 

•	 Risk (safety of DOD Forces) 

•	 Cost (including the source of funding and the effect on the DOD budget) 

•	 Appropriateness (whether providing the requested support is in the interest of the 

Department) and 

•	 Readiness (impact on DoD’s ability to perform its primary mission)69 

2. State Governors 

As the principle authority during state emergencies, Governors may direct an immediate response 

using National Guard personnel under state command and control (including personnel in a Title 32 

status); however, National Guard personnel will not be placed in or extended in Title 32 status to 

conduct State immediate response activities. Additionally, state leadership must coordinate with the 

Chief of the National Guard Bureau to approve the continued use of personnel in a Title 32 status 

responding in accordance with immediate response authority in excess of seventy-two hours. 

D. Conclusion 

The NRF and NIMS are a paradigmatic shift from the pre-9/11 and pre-Hurricane Katrina approach 

of the federal government to domestic incident management. Although the Stafford Act remains the 

primary mechanism for federal support to state and local authorities, and state requests for 

assistance still formally initiate the federal response, the manner in which the federal government 

provides the assistance is changing. Consolidation, unification, anticipation, and systemization are 

the unifying themes of these key changes. For example, it is possible that DoD personnel or assets 

69 These factors are colloquially known as the CARRLL factors (cost, appropriateness, risk, readiness, legality, 

lethality). 

Chapter 2 

29 National Framework for Incident Management 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

could be among first responders to an emergency or disaster (e.g., an event in close proximity to a 

DoD installation). In such a case, DoD personnel and assets might be employed pursuant to 

immediate response authority per DoDD 3025.18 before a larger federal response is orchestrated 

under the NRF. Figure 2-2 below outlines different processes by which local requests for assistance 

would be handled following a Stafford Act declaration and under immediate response authority. 

Figure 2-2. 

Chapter 2 

National Framework for Incident Management 30 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 3 

DOD RESPONSE FOR CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, 

RADIOLOGICAL, NUCLEAR, AND HIGH-YIELD EXPLOSIVES 

(CBRNE) CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (as amended), Pub. L. No. 93­

288, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5121–5207. 

•	 The Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act, 50 U.S.C. §§ 2301–2368 (2007). 

•	 EO 13527 Establishing Federal Capability for the Timely Provision of Medical 

Countermeasures Following a Biological Attack, December 30, 2009. 

•	 National Response Framework, January 2008. 

•	 DoDD 3025.18, Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA), December 29, 2010. 

•	 DoDD 3025.12, Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances (MACDIS), February 4, 1994. 

•	 DoDD 3150.08, DOD Response to Nuclear and Radiological Incidents, January 20, 2010. 

•	 DoDD 5525.5, DOD Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, January 15, 1986, 

incorporating change 1, December 20, 1989. 

•	 CJCSI 3125.01A, “Military Assistance to Domestic Consequence Management Operations in 

Response to a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, or High-Yield Explosive Situation,” 

March 16, 2007. 

•	 Joint Pub 3-29, Counterterrorism, November 13, 2009. 

•	 Joint Pub 3-28, Civil Support, September 14, 2007. 

•	 Joint Pub 3-41, Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, or High-Yield Explosive 

Consequence Management, October 2, 2006. 

•	 FM 3-28, Civil Support Operations, September 2, 2010. 

A. Introduction 

In the wake of 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) developed 

the National Response Framework.1

 This document evolved from the National Response Plan 

(NRP), which, in turn, was mandated under Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-5), 

Management of Domestic Incidents. The intent of HSPD-5 was to develop a single, comprehensive 

approach to domestic incident management2

 built on the template of the National Incident 

Management System (NIMS).3

 The NRF provides national-level policy and operational direction 

1

 The National Response Framework (NRF) is addressed in more detail in Chapter 2. 

2

 The term “Incident Management” was introduced, under the National Response Plan (NRP), with a view toward 

eliminating the distinction between crisis and consequence management. Although NRF also uses incident management 

to denote both crisis and consequence management, for the purposes of this chapter, the distinctions between crisis and 

consequence management remain important, especially in the response to any incident that may result from terrorist 

activity. Crisis management is predominantly a law enforcement response and involves measures to identify, acquire, 

plan, and employ the use of resources needed to anticipate, prevent, and/or resolve a threat or act of terrorism. 

Consequence management are those actions taken to maintain or restore essential services and manage and mitigate 

problems resulting from disasters and catastrophes, including natural, manmade, or terrorist incidents. 

3

 The National Incident Management System (NIMS) provides a doctrinal framework for incident management 

designed to provide consistency at all jurisdictional levels. NIMS includes a core set of concepts, principles, 

Chapter 3 

31 DoD Response to CBRNE 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

for all federal agencies involved in the response to domestic disasters or emergencies. While 

responses to incidents should generally be handled at the lowest capable jurisdictional level, the 

NRF and NIMS contemplate the needs that must be met when the responding jurisdiction’s 

capabilities are overwhelmed by the magnitude of a catastrophic incident. 

The NRF is designed to ensure timely and effective federal support in response to state, tribal, 

and/or local requests for assistance (RFAs). The NRF is the product of DHS, but it applies to all 

federal departments and agencies that have jurisdiction for, or responsibility to support, any 

response or recovery effort. When federal resources are necessary, DoD may provide advice, 

assistance, and assets in support of the Lead Federal Agency (LFA). DoD plays only a supporting 

role, unless otherwise directed by the President,4

 and its activities are referred to as Defense 

Support to Civilian Authorities (DSCA), or simply “civil support.”5 

The NRF and NIMS provide broad direction for any type of disaster, in what is characterized as an 

“all-hazards” approach.6

 Consequently, the framework applies equally to natural disaster relief, the 

handling of an unintentional or negligent industrial accident, or the Federal government’s response 

to a terrorist’s potential domestic employment of a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, 

and high-yield Explosives (CBRNE) weapons of mass destruction (WMD).7 Although the various 

levels of government have experience in responding to natural disasters, CBRNE events pose some 

of the greatest challenges facing the United States today8

 and underscore the importance of 

maintaining a DoD force that is ready and able to respond to the specialized threats. 

terminology, and technologies covering the incident command system; multi-agency coordination systems; unified 

command; training; identification and management of resources (including systems for classifying types of resources); 

qualifications and certification; and the collection, tracking, and reporting of incident information and incident 

resources. 

4

 Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub. 3-28, Civil Support, at vii (14 September 2007) [hereinafter Joint Pub. 3-28]. 

5

 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.18, Defense Support to Civil Authorities, 29 Dec. 10, at 16 (hereinafter DoDD 

3025.18] defines “DSCA” as: 

Support provided by U.S. Federal military forces, DoD civilians, DoD contract personnel, DoD 

Component assets, and National Guard forces (when the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with 

the Governors of the affected States, elects and requests to use those forces in title 32, U.S.C. status) 

in response to requests for assistance from civil authorities for domestic emergencies, law 

enforcement support, and other domestic activities, or from qualifying entities for special events. 

Also known as civil support. 6

 Federal consequence management was traditionally focused on natural disasters. Following the attacks of 9/11, 

emergency planning and consequence management experts advocated for a single, “all-hazards” process for planning 

and responding to both natural disasters and man-made events, including acts of terrorism. See NRF supra note 1, at 2. 7

 It is important to note that while the employment of any weapon of mass destruction (WMD) will constitute a 

CBRNE incident, not all CBRNE incidents are the result of a WMD. A domestic accident on the scale of the radiation 

release in Chernobyl, Ukraine, Fukushima, Japan, or the pesticide release in Bhopal, India would most likely result in 

DoD-assisted CBRNE CM operations. 

8

 In 2006, DHS released National Planning Scenarios, an in-depth analysis of fifteen potential disasters that face the 

nation. 

Scenario 1: Nuclear Detonation – 10-kiloton Improvised Nuclear Device 

Scenario 2: Biological Attack – Aerosol Anthrax 

Scenario 3: Biological Disease Outbreak – Pandemic Influenza 

Scenario 4: Biological Attack – Plague 

Chapter 3 

DoD Response to CBRNE 32 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

B. CBRNE CM Overview and Authorities 

A CBRNE incident is any accident or intentional event involving chemical agents, biological 

agents, radiological sources, nuclear devices, or high-yield explosives, and/or industrial materials 

that are hazardous by themselves or when mixed with other material, including hazards from 

industrial pollutants and waste, and will produce a toxic effect to an exposed person. Any action 

taken to address the consequences of any inadvertent or deliberate release of a chemical, biological, 

radiological, or nuclear agent constitutes a CBRNE CM operation.9 As a general proposition, a 

catastrophic CBRNE event would quickly exceed the capabilities of local, state, and tribal 

governments; consequently, CBRNE CM10 is normally managed at the federal level, with DoD in a 

supporting role.11 

The principle of “unity of effort” dictates that a single authority control the efforts of the various 

responding federal assets; while DoD forces may be fully committed to CBRNE CM, they are not, 

however, directed by the LFA they support. The Secretary of Defense always retains command of 

federal (Title 10) military forces providing CBRNE CM. Similarly, state governors, through their 

Adjutants General, control National Guard forces when performing duty in a state status or in 

accordance with Title 32 of the United States Code. 

A request for DoD capabilities from state governors or other federal agencies is called a request for 

assistance (RFA). In most cases, these requests for emergency support are written and are 

Scenario 5: Chemical Attack – Blister Agent 

Scenario 6: Chemical Attack – Toxic Industrial Chemicals 

Scenario 7: Chemical Attack – Nerve Agent 

Scenario 8: Chemical Attack – Chlorine Tank Explosion 

Scenario 9: Natural Disaster – Major Earthquake 

Scenario 10: Natural Disaster – Major Hurricane 

Scenario 11: Radiological Attack – Radiological Dispersal Devices 

Scenario 12: Explosives Attack – Bombing Using Improvised Explosive Devices 

Scenario 13: Biological Attack – Food Contamination 

Scenario 14: Biological Attack – Foreign Animal Disease (Foot-and-Mouth Disease) 

Scenario 15: Cyber Attack 

See DEP’T OF HOMELAND SECURITY, NATIONAL PLANNING SCENARIOS, April, 2006. Two of the scenarios represent 

natural disasters, major earthquake and major hurricane; a third highlights economic and social complications resulting 

from a cyber attack; the remaining 12 scenarios focus on chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield 

explosive (CBRNE) incidents. 

9 An exception to this general classification is the Government’s response to incidents involving U.S. nuclear weapons 

within DOD custody or fissionable materials within Department of Energy custody. See generally ESF 10; DoD 

3150.8-M, “NUCLEAR WEAPON ACCIDENT RESPONSE PROCEDURES (NARP),” February 22, 2005. 10 CBRNE CM includes those measures and methods of responding to CBRNE events to alleviate damage, loss of life, 

hardship or suffering caused by the incident, protect public health and safety, emergency restoration of essential 

government services and infrastructure, and provide emergency relief to governments, businesses, and individuals 

affected by the consequences of a CBRNE situation. 

11 For example, 10 U.S.C. § 382 (2006) authorizes the Attorney General to request DoD support when an emergency 

situation involving a biological or chemical weapon of mass destruction exists. Additionally, as an exception to the 

Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. § 831 authorizes the Attorney General—during an emergency situation—to request 

DoD support in enforcing laws against the unlawful dispersal of nuclear material or nuclear byproducts. 

Chapter 3 

33 DoD Response to CBRNE 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

processed through formal RFA process. The processing of an RFA varies depending upon the size 

and urgency of the incident, the level of federal involvement, and the originator of the request. For 

small scale CBRNE incidents, and during the initial stages of larger incidents, a state’s Emergency 

Operations Center (EOC) may forward requests to the FEMA region’s Defense Coordinating 

Officer (DCO), who, in turn, forwards the RFA to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland 

Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs (ASD(HD&ASA)).12 If the incident exceeds the 

capabilities of the state and local responders, and the President has issued an emergency or disaster 

declaration at the Governor’s request, the LFA will establish a Joint Field Office (JFO), and a 

Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) will be designated. 

Following the establishment of the JFO, the FCO will forward RFAs from civil authorities to the 

Office of the Executive Secretary of the Department of Defense, who forwards them to the 

ASD(HD&ASA) and the Joint Director of Military Support (JDOMS) for validation and order 

processing, respectively. Once SecDef approves a request for DOD assistance, JDOMS prepares an 

order and coordinates with necessary force providers, legal counsel, and ASD(HD&ASA) to ensure 

asset priority and concurrence. The order is then issued to the appropriate combatant command to 

execute the mission. 

12 The ASD(HD/ASA) is the DoD Executive Agent responsible for approving and monitoring DoD assistance for 

federal, state, and local officials in responding to domestic threats or events involving nuclear, chemical, and biological 

weapons. See 50 U.S.C. § 2313 (2006). 

Chapter 3 

DoD Response to CBRNE 34 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Figure 3.1. RFA Process Decision Matrix. 

Figure 3-1, above, illustrates the flow of a request for military response to a CBRNE event from the 

LFA to DoD. The request is submitted to ASD(HD&ASA) for approval, who then forwards the 

request to the Joint Staff for execution. JDOMS issues an Execute Order (EXORD) to Commander, 

USNORTHCOM, Commander, USSOUTHCOM or Commander, USPACOM, depending upon 

which Area of Responsibility encompasses the CBRNE event. The Combatant Commander then 

orders the Commander, JTF-CS, to conduct consequence management operations. 

Every RFA must undergo a legal review. All requests by civil authorities for DoD military 

assistance shall be evaluated by DoD approval authorities against the following criteria: 

• Legality (compliance with laws); 

• Lethality (potential use of lethal force by or against DOD forces); 

• Risk (safety of DOD forces); 

• Cost (who pays, impact on DOD budget); 

Chapter 3 

35 DoD Response to CBRNE 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

•	 Appropriateness (whether the requested mi ssion is in the DOD’s interest); and 

•	 Readiness (impact on the DOD’s ability to perform its primary mission). 

Military missions require legal authority. DoD’s CBRNE CM operations are generally executed 

under the provisions of The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.13 

The Stafford Act authorizes the Federal Government to assist local and state governments alleviate 

the suffering and damage caused by disasters.14 

Occasionally, the legal authority to use DoD forces for CBRNE incidents arises from other sources: 

•	 For instance, DoDD 3025.18 delegates Immediate Response authority to DoD component, 

military commanders and State officials to temporarily employ resources under their contro l— 

subject to any supplemental direction provided by higher headquarters—to provide immediate 

assistance to civil authorities to save lives, prevent human suffering, or mitigate great property 

damage in the event of imminently serious conditions resulting from any civil emergency or 

attack.15 It is important to note that this authority is extremely fact specific and expires 

immediately when the facts no longer meet the threshold. It is “important for commande rs to 

understand that the policy is limited, restrictive, and conditional.”16 There is both a temporal 

and proximity aspect to immediate response. Furthermore, current DoD and NGB policy 

requires a reassessment no later than 72 hours after commencement of the response. 

13 The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, (Public Law 93-288) (42 U.S.C. § 5121, et 

seq.) (as amended) [hereinafter Stafford Act]. 14 The Stafford Act is outlined in Chapter 2. The Secretary of Homeland Security is responsible for overall 

coordination of federal Stafford and non-Stafford incident management activities. Requests for DoD assistance may 

occur under Stafford Act or non-Stafford Act conditions. In general, a Stafford Act incident is one in which state and 

local authorities declare a state of emergency but require federal assistance to adequately manage the incident and 

consequently request federal assistance. 

 42 U.S.C. 5122 (1) defines an emergency as: 

[A]ny occasion or instance for which, in the determination of the President, Federal assistance is 

needed to supplement State and local efforts and capabilities to save lives and to protect property 

and public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the 

United States. 

Thus, a CBRNE incident could easily fit under this category. 

 42 U.S.C. § 5122(2) defines a major disaster as: 

[A]ny natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind-driven water, 

tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought), 

or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the 

determination of the President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant 

major disaster assistance under this Act to supplement the efforts and available resources of States, 

local governments, and disaster relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or 

suffering caused thereby. 

Thus, a fire, flood, or explosion would have to occur to trigger a major disaster declaration for a CBRNE incident. 

15 DoDD 3025.18, supra note 5, paras. 4.g & f. 16 JOINT PUB 3-28, supra note 19, II-7. 

Chapter 3 

DoD Response to CBRNE 36 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 DoDD 3025.18 provides federal military commanders with “emergency authority” to engage 

temporarily in “activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil 

disturbances...”17 

•	 Executive Order 13527, “Establishing Federal Capability for the Timely Provision of Medical 

Countermeasures Following a Biological Attack,” provides authority for designated federal 

agencies to include the DoD to provide support to operations that leverage the U.S. Postal 

Service to distribute “medical countermeasures” to the general population.18 

•	 Joint Publication 3-28 sanctions immediate response authority for various CBRNE incidentrelated operations, such as search and rescue missions and debris removal.19 

C. DoD Entities Responsible for CBRNE CM Operations 

The National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 200320 established what later became the 

Office of The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs 

(ASD(HD/ASA)). The ASD(HD/ASA) assumed responsibilities as DoD’s Executive Agent 

responsible for approving and monitoring DoD assistance for federal, state, and local officials in 

responding to domestic threats or events involving nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. As a 

result, this office oversees defense support of civilian authorities (DSCA), including CBRNE CM. 

17 DoDD 3025, supra note 6, para 4.h.
 

18 EO 13527, Establishing Federal Capability for the Timely Provision of Medical Countermeasures Following a 

Biological Attack (Dec. 30, 2009).
 19 See JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, JOINT PUB 3-28, CIVIL SUPPORT, (14 Sep 07) [hereinafter JOINT PUB. 3-28], at II-7. A 

commander engaged in CBRNE CM operations: 

responding to a SecDef approved DSCA mission and/or execute order (EXORD), is like any other 

DoD military commander and may find the need to exercise his/her immediate response authority 

with available forces. This is particularly relevant in the event of a second terrorist attack . . . within 

the JOA, since trained medical and specialized CBRNE assessment/response teams are on the scene 

and able to rapidly respond to time-sensitive requests from the civil sector. . . . As soon as practical, 

the military commander, or responsible official of a DoD component or agency rendering such 

assistance, shall report the request, the nature of the response, and any other pertinent information 

through the chain of command to the National Military Command Center, so that the information is 

received within a few hours of the local commander’s decision to provide immediate response 

support. Immediate response requests in the event of a CBRNE incident may include, but are not 

limited to: 

1. Rescue, evacuation, and emergency medical treatment of casualties, maintenance or restoration of 

emergency medical capabilities, and safeguarding the public health. 

2. Emergency clearance of debris, rubble, and explosives ordnance from public facilities and other 

areas to permit rescue or movement of people and restoration of essential services. 

3. Detection, assessment, and containment (initial steps taken to facilitate emergency evacuation and 

public awareness warnings). 

4. Roadway movement control and planning. 

5. Emergency restoration of essential public services (including fire-fighting, water,
 

communications, transportation, power, and fuel).
 

but see, 32 C.F.R. § 185.3.
 20 The Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act of 2003, Pub. L. No. 107-314, § 902. 

Chapter 3 

37 DoD Response to CBRNE 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

The Joint Director of Military Support (JDOMS) is an action agency subordinate to ASD(HD/ASA) 

that is located at the Pentagon. For DSCA, JDOMS plans, coordinates, and monitors DoD support 

within the U.S. and territories in response to requests from federal agencies. Accordingly, JDOMs 

produces military orders for DSCA, including consequence management operations. For Special 

Events, e.g. National Special Security Events, international sport competitions, JDOMS plans, 

coordinates, and facilitates DoD support to federal, state, and local agencies and organizers for 

significant international and domestic events. 

In 2002, DoD also established the USNORTHCOM to consolidate under a single unified command 

all existing missions previously executed by other military organizations.21 The specific mission of 

USNORTHCOM, headquartered in Colorado Springs, Colorado, is to “conduct[] homeland defense, 

civil support, and security operations within the assigned area of responsibility to defend, protect, 

and secure the United States and its interests.”22 USNORTHCOM is designated as the command to 

conduct CBRNE CM operations in support of a LFA in the forty-eight contiguous states, the 

District of Columbia, Alaska, and U.S. territorial waters.23 Based upon the magnitude of the 

CBRNE incident and required response, USNORTHCOM determines the appropriate level of 

command for, and composition of, the DoD CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force 

(CCMRF). 

In 2008, USNORTHCOM designated U.S. Army North (ARNORTH) as the Joint Force Land 

Component Commander (JFLCC) for domestic CM operations. ARNORTH, located at Fort Sam 

Houston, Texas, is responsible for developing and unifying the military response capability for 

CBRNE incidents.24 As the JFLCC, ARNORTH now has operational control of Joint Task Force 

Civil Support (JTF-CS), which had previously been directly subordinate to USNORTHCOM. 

JTF-CS is a standing joint task force comprised of active, reserve, and National Guard members 

from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard, as well as civilian personnel, and is 

commanded by a Federalized Army National Guard General Officer. The unit’s purpose is to save 

lives, prevent injury, and provide temporary critical life support during a CBRNE incident in the 

United States or its territories and possessions. The JTF-CS is the only military organization 

dedicated solely to planning and integrating DoD forces for CBRNE CM support to civil authorities 

in such a situation. 

D. Specialized DoD CBRNE Responders 

1. Joint Task Force Civil Support 

Joint doctrine divides civil support (CS) operations into three broad categories:25 domestic 

emergencies; designated law enforcement support;26 and other activities,27 based on the CS 

21 Unified Command Plan 2002.
 22 USNORTHCOM, http://www.northcom.mil/About/index.html (last visited Jun. 29, 2011). 23 CDRUSNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3500-08 (CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL, NUCLEAR AND HIGH-YIELD 

EXPLOSIVES CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS (CBRNE CM), paras. 1b(1) and 1e(1) (22 Oct. 08)(U). 24 USNORTHCOM, About NORTHCOM, http://www.northcom.mil/About/index.html (last visited July 26, 2011). 

25 JOINT PUB. 3-28, supra note 4, III-1.
 

26 When situations are beyond the capability of the state, the governor requests federal assistance through the President. 

DoD support or assistance to restore public services and civil order may include augmentation of local first responders 

Chapter 3 

DoD Response to CBRNE 38 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

definition. Although Joint Task Force Civil Support (JTF-CS) is nominally linked to broader 

mission areas, the organization’s focus is far narrower; JTF-CS’ specific mission is CBRNE CM. 

JTF-CS is a standing joint task force headquarters presently located at Fort Monroe, Virginia.28 It is 

a deployable command and control headquarters for DoD units and personnel executing CM 

operations in response to CBRNE incidents, and a source of response plans for essential DoD 

support to the LFA. The unit’s mission is to plan and integrate DoD support to the designated LFA 

(usually DHS/FEMA) for domestic CBRNE CM. When directed, JTF-CS will deploy to the 

incident site and establish command and control of designated DoD forces to provide defense 

support of civil authorities to save lives, prevent further injury, and provide temporary critical life 

support. The NRF provides the coordinating framework under which JTF-CS performs its mission. 

An Army or Air Force National Guard General on federal active duty status commands JTF-CS. 

The staff consists of active and reserve component military from all five services, government 

service personnel, and civilian contractors. Collectively, the command possesses expertise in a 

wide range of functional areas to include operations, logistics, intelligence, planning, 

communications, and medical services. Created by the Unified Command Plan for 1999,29 JTF-CS 

provides both an operational capability and an oversight mechanism that can anticipate support 

requirements for responding to a catastrophic CBRNE incident, undertake detailed analysis, conduct 

exercises, and ultimately respond in support of civil authorities. The unit’s focus is entirely on 

CBRNE consequence management. 

On October 1, 2008, JTF-CS received operational control over various units assigned to the 

CCMRF, or CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force. These units possess the military 

occupational specialties required to staff DoD’s initial CBRNE CM entry force. The CCMRF is 

and equipment. It may include law enforcement support, continuity of operations/continuity of government measures to 

restore essential government services, protect public health and safety, and provide emergency relief to affected 

governments, businesses, and individuals. Responses occur under the primary jurisdiction of the affected state and local 

government, and the federal government provides assistance when required. See JOINT PUB. 3-28, supra note 4,, 

Executive Summary, at x. 

27 These other activities include support to special events designated by the DHS Special Events Working Group 

(SEWG). “National special security event” (NSSE) is a designation given to certain special events that, by virtue of 

their political, economic, social, or religious significance, may be the target of terrorism or other criminal activity. The 

Secretary of Homeland Security, after consultation with the Homeland Security Council, shall be responsible for 

designating special events as NSSEs. Usually, other military operations will have priority over these missions, unless 

directed otherwise by the SecDef. These events will be assigned a priority by the SEWG and will normally be 

monitored by the combatant command responsible for the area of responsibility in which they are conducted. See infra, 

chapter 7. 

28 Due to Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC), JTF-CS anticipates moving from Fort Monroe, Virginia to Fort 

Eustis, Virginia during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2011. See JOINT TASK FORCE CIVIL SUPPORT, 

http://www.jtfcs.northcom.mil/ (last visited Jul. 26, 2011). 

29 Even though the Unified Command Plan for 1999 doesn’t specifically mention JTF-CS, the SECDEF memo 

accompanying the plan when forwarded to the President notified the President that the SECDEF intended to establish a 

standing Joint Task Force for Civil Support. The unit would report to the SECDEF through the U.S. Joint Forces 

Command and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Its principle focus would be to plan for and integrate DoD’s 

support to the lead federal agency that would have the responsibility to manage the consequences of a domestic 

weapons of mass destruction (WMD) event. The SECDEF felt that, due to the catastrophic nature of a WMD terrorist 

event that would quickly overwhelm state and local authorities, the structure that existed for providing DoD support 

needed to be expanded. 

Chapter 3 

39 DoD Response to CBRNE 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

comprised of approximately 4,700 service members but may be augmented as necessary by force 

packages tailored to the particular type of incident and response required. The CCMRF forces are 

configured into subordinate task forces with specific response missions, such as medical, aviation, 

and operational support. When called upon to perform its mission, JTF-CS and the CCMRF will 

quickly deploy to mitigate the effects of a CBRNE incident.30 

JTF-CS employs a three-fold process that enables the command to gain and maintain situational 

awareness prior to an execution order. First, JTF-CS staffs an around-the-clock operations center 

tasked with gaining and maintaining situational awareness. Second, the command has liaison 

officers who routinely interact with interagency partners to ensure familiarity with their operations, 

facilitate interagency communications and operations, and gain first-hand understanding of their 

emergency response plans. Third, when an incident actually occurs but prior to the receipt of an 

execution order, JTF-CS is prepared to send an assessment element to the incident area. This 

element is referred to as the NORTHCOM Situational Awareness Team (NSAT). The NSAT’s 

purpose is to establish the “ground truth” concerning what emergency assets and capabilities are 

either at-hand or available to emergency managers through intrastate or interstate compacts. The 

NSAT provides this information to the Commander, USNORTHCOM, to assist in his decisionmaking. Additionally, the information enables JTF-CS planners to perform predictive analysis 

regarding the types of missions that the LFA may ask DoD to perform. These extensive planning 

efforts enable DoD to organize a timely flow of appropriate assets to the incident area upon request. 

Upon receipt of an execution order, JTF-CS has the ability to reconfigure into two command posts 

to ensure continuity of operations at home station, while deploying forward to the incident site. The 

magnitude of the CBRNE incident determines the size of the deploying command post. 

Additionally, JTF-CS routinely provides support to other commands during real-world events with 

Joint Planning Augmentation Cells (JPACs). JPACs consist of five to fifteen individuals with 

extensive consequence management planning skills that can help other staffs plan for and respond 

to CBRNE or other incidents in their immediate area of responsibility. JPACs are tailored to fit the 

type of support requested by the supported organization. 

2. National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams 

Pursuant to the Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Act, and additional 

authorizations by Congress, DoD is authorized a total of 55 WMD-CSTs.31 Recognizing that the 

National Guard is “forward-deployed for civil support,”32 the Secretary of Defense determined that 

the CSTs would be most effective if established in the National Guard. Consequently, each WMDCST is composed of twenty-two full-time National Guard Soldiers and Airmen and contains five 

elements: command, operations, administrative/ logistics, medical, and survey. 

30 JOINT TASK FORCE CIVIL SUPPORT, CCMRF, http://www.jtfcs.northcom.mil/CCMRF.aspx (last visited Jul. 26, 

2011). 

31 The number of authorized CSTs is the culmination of legislative actions during the last decade. For a current 

account overview of CSTs, see http://www.army.mil/aps/09/information_papers/national_guard_weapons.html (last 

visited 19 July 2011).
 32 U.S. Secretary of Defense Report to Congress pursuant to FY00 National Defense Authorization Act § 1036, 2 (24 

Feb. 2000). 

Chapter 3 

DoD Response to CBRNE 40 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

The teams are designed to deploy rapidly to assist local first responders in the event of an 

intentional or unintentional CBRNE incident.33 Specifically, the mission of each state National 

Guard WMD-CSTs is to deploy to an area of operations and: 

•	 Assess a suspected event in support of a local incident commander; 

•	 Advise the local incident commander and civilian responders; and 

•	 Facilitate requests for assistance to expedite arrival of additional state and federal assets to help 

save lives, prevent human suffering, and mitigate great property damage. 

WMD-CSTs are specially equipped and trained. Special equipment includes the Mobile Analytical 

Laboratory System (MALS)34 for nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) detection and the 

Unified Command Suite (UCS) vehicle for communications.35 

WMD-CST capabilities are specifically designed to complement civilian responders.36 Community 

and state emergency management plans may directly incorporate WMD-CST capabilities. 

WMD-CSTs will operate under the command and control of the state governor and the Adjutant 

General. Individual team members serve in a full-time, Title 32 National Guard status.37 If the 

teams are called to federal active duty, they will normally be attached with operational control to 

JTF-CS.38 

In addition, WMD-CSTs assigned to one state are authorized to operate in another state when one or 

more of the following conditions are met: 

•	 State-to-State Emergency Management Assistance Compacts (EMACs); 

•	 State-to-State Memoranda of Agreement; or, 

•	 Activation under Title 10.39 

3. NG CBRNE Enhanced Response Force Package (NG CERFP) 

The CERFP is a response capability comprised of 186 traditional and 5 Title 32 Active Guard and 

Reserve (AGR) National Guard members. CERFP can be utilized in state active duty, Title 32, or 

Title 10 status. There are currently 17 CERFPs in the United States. CERFP’s mission is to 

respond to CBRNE incidents and assist local, state, and federal agencies in conducting consequence 

management by providing capabilities to conduct patient and mass casualty decontamination, 

emergency medical services, and casualty search and extraction. 

33 Id. 

34 Id. at 3. MALS is based on system used by the Marine Corps’ Chemical Biological Incident Response Forces with 

enhanced biological detection capability. 

35 Id. The UCS, built by the Navy, provides communication interface across the ICS frequencies, military command
 

and control elements, and technical support assets. 

36 Id. at 4. 37 Id. at 5. 

38 Id. 39 Id. at 6. See infra Chapter 10, Reserve Components, for a detailed discussion of EMACs. 

Chapter 3 

41 DoD Response to CBRNE 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

4. National Guard Homeland Response Force (HRF) 

Presently under development, the HRF is a regional response capability. There are projected to be 

ten HRFs (one per FEMA region), each with 5,660 personnel. Each HRF is essentially a CERFPplus security and regional C2 element. HRFs, as contemplated, will conduct command and control; 

security; search and extraction; decontamination; and medical triage as needed in order to save lives 

and mitigate human suffering. 

E. Special Legal Considerations During CBRNE CM Operations 

The parameters under which DoD operates domestically vary greatly from those in traditional 

military activities. DoD domestic CBRNE CM activities raise legal issues not usually found in 

more typical military operations. Depending on the circumstances, and the location of the incident, 

the scope and complexity of potential legal issues will greatly vary. Of specific note, the following 

four legal issues may arise in the context of a CBRNE CM operation. As these areas are largely 

driven by policy decisions at the SECDEF level or higher—and are additionally vetted through the 

normal mission assignment process—judge advocates on the operational and tactical levels should 

receive primary guidance concerning these issues through appropriate mission EXORDs and 

FRAGOs. Judge advocates should also become familiar with the primary federal and state 

authorities discussed below. 

1. Quarantine/Isolation 

Quarantine40 and isolation41 enforcement issues may arise most typically in pandemic scenarios. 

State and local health authorities are most commonly responsible for decisions to impose quarantine 

or isolation, and the power to enforce these is generally considered to be part of a jurisdiction’s 

police powers.42 Federal power to impose quarantine and isolation measures arises concerning 

attempts to halt or impede the “introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from 

foreign countries into the States or possessions, or from one State or possession into any other State 

or possession.”43 

Regardless of whether the quarantine and isolation measures are imposed at the federal, state, or 

local level, DoD enforcement actions will likely be subject to the Posse Comitatus Act,44 absent an 

alternative statutory or constitutional authority. One such exception would be DoD enforcement of 

a quarantine or isolation under circumstances that have given rise to Presidential invocation of the 

Insurrection Act.45 Typically, however, any DoD support provided to quarantine and isolation 

40 “Quarantine” is defined as the “[s]eparation of individuals who have been exposed to an infection but are not yet ill 

from other individuals who have not been exposed to the transmissible infection.” Homeland Security Council, 

National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza: Implementation Plan 209 (GPO May 2006). 41 “Isolation” is defined as the “[s]eparation of infected individuals from those individuals that are not infected.” Id. at 

208. 

42 U.S. Congressional Research Service. Federal and State Quarantine and Isolation Authority 2 (RL33201; Jan. 23, 

2007), by Kathleen S. Swendiman and Jennifer K. Elsea.
 43 42 U.S.C. § 264(a). Additionally, in some situations, the federal government may intervene if it deems state and
 

local control measures to be inadequate. 42 C.F.R. § 70.2. 44 18 U.S.C. § 1385. 45 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335. 

Chapter 3 

DoD Response to CBRNE 42 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

support will be limited to logistical, communications, medical, and other support commonly 

envisioned by the Stafford Act. 

2. Environmental Compliance 

Judge advocates planning for CBRNE CM operations should assume that federal, state, and local 

environmental laws and regulations will remain in place, at least insofar as they pertain to DoD 

response operations. For example, the Stafford Act specifically states that NEPA applies to actions 

undertaken pursuant to the Act. In the context of CBRNE CM operations, NEPA provides for an 

exception to NEPA’s environmental impact statement requirement when such an action is intended 

to “restore a facility substantially to its condition prior to the disaster or emergency.” Specifically, 

such actions are deemed NOT a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 

environment.46 

Although the Stafford Act does contain a blanket waiver authority of “administrative conditions for 

assistance” for federal agencies,47 this authority does not overcome statutory requirements. 

Additionally, the EPA or appropriate ESF 10 agencies, rather than DoD, would normally issue any 

environmental waivers. 

The handling and disposal of waste from CBRNE CM decontamination operations will frequently 

implicate environmental compliance issues. In such a scenario, the EPA, operating under ESF 10, 

would be the primary agency responsible for hazardous waste management.48 Additionally, 

coordination with state authorities regarding the state’s environmental laws and regulations is 

essential. Judge advocates should ensure that appropriate staff sections and levels of command 

have ascertained whether the decontamination and decontaminated waste disposal procedures 

outlined in FM 3-11.549 are sufficient for CBRNE CM operations, or whether those procedures 

should be modified pursuant to guidance from appropriate state and federal regulatory agencies. 

3. Health Care Licensure 

In a domestic CBRNE event, non-fatality casualties may range from minimal to overwhelming. 

The National Planning Scenarios’ casualty numbers for domestic CBRNE events range from a few 

hundred (radiological dispersal device) through hundreds of thousands (improvised nuclear device) 

to nearly ten million (pandemic influenza).50 The greater the number of casualties, the more likely 

that any requested DoD support will include requests for DoD medical personnel to provide care for 

the affected populace. Because DoD caregivers may not necessarily be licensed/credentialed in 

accordance with appropriate state laws, judge advocates must be prepared to render advice on 

federal and state licensure requirements during emergency support operations. Upon a command’s 

receipt of any mission assignments relating to the provision of health-related services (or even prior 

to receipt, if practicable), judge advocates on the operational and tactical levels should verify with 

46 42 U.S.C. § 5159. 47 42 U.S.C. § 5141. 48 Dep’t of Homeland Security, National Response Framework, Emergency Support Function #10 (Oil and Hazardous
 

Materials Response Annex), Jan. 2008. 

49 U.S. Dep’t of Army, Field Manual 3-11.5, Multiservice Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for Chemical, 

Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Decontamination (4 Apr. 06) [hereinafter FM 3-11.5]. 50 Dep’t of Homeland Security, National Planning Scenarios (6 Apr. 2006). 

Chapter 3 

43 DoD Response to CBRNE 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

higher headquarters that any health care licensure requirements have been met or waived by 

appropriate authorities, and that there is a common understanding between the various agencies 

involved (including DoD, ESF 8, and state and local agencies) of the statutory portability provisions 

discussed below. 

The primary federal statute regarding credentialing of military personnel is 10 U.S.C. § 1094 

(Licensure requirement for health care professionals). This law states that an armed forces health 

care professional who has a current license and is performing authorized duties for DoD may 

practice his or her health care profession in any state, notwithstanding any other health care 

licensure laws and regardless of whether the practice occurs in a DoD facility, a civilian facility 

affiliated with DoD, or any other location authorized by SECDEF.51 DoD has promulgated 

qualification and coordination requirements to this statutory portability provision as it pertains to 

off-base duties.52 The various qualification/coordination with state licensing board requirements 

pertaining to health care personnel involved in off-base duties can be found in DoD 6025.13-R, 

para. C.4.2. 

On the state level, many jurisdictions have passed emergency management provisions containing 

portability of licensure provisions. For example, the Florida Governor’s proclamation of a major or 

catastrophic disaster is authority for a health care practitioner licensed in another state to assist in 

providing health care in the disaster area according to the provisions specified in the 

proclamation.53 Similarly, California permits health care providers licensed in other states to 

provide health care during a statutorily defined state of emergency if the emergency overwhelms 

California health care practitioners’ response capabilities and California’s Director of the 

Emergency Medical Service Authority so requests.54 Although during a Stafford Act response, 

DoD support will not normally be provided absent a specific request from State authorities, judge 

advocates, through their technical chain, should ensure that all appropriate agencies and levels of 

command have a common understanding of the state laws and rules regarding licensure and how 

those laws complement Title 10 provisions. 

Also, at the state level, judge advocates can look to either the applicable state’s Emergency 

Management Assistance Compact (EMAC)55 or Article VI of the Model EMAC legislation, which 

states: 

If a person or entity holds a license, certificate or other permit issued by a 

participating political subdivision or the state evidencing qualification in a 

professional, mechanical or other skill and the assistance of that person or entity 

is requested by a participating political subdivision, the person or entity shall be 

51 10 U.S.C. § 1094(d)(1). 52 “Off base duties” are “[o]fficially assigned professional duties performed at an authorized location outside a MTF
 

and any military installation.” U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Reg. 6025.13-R, Military Health System Clinical Quality 

Assurance Program, para. DL1.1.32 (Jun. 11, 2004). 

53 Fla. Stat. § 252.36(3)(c)1. 

54 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 900.
 55 EMAC is governed by the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA), a non-profit organization. See
 

NAT’L EMERGENCY MGMT ASS’N, What is NEMA, 

http://www.nemaweb.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44&Itemid=357 (last visited Jul. 26, 

2011). 

Chapter 3 

DoD Response to CBRNE 44 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

deemed to be licensed, certified or permitted in the political subdivision 

requesting assistance for the duration of the declared emergency or authorized 

drills or exercises and subject to any limitations and conditions the chief 

executive of the participating political subdivision receiving the assistance may 

prescribe by executive order or otherwise.56 

Even if the state has passed the model EMAC legislation without alteration, however, judge 

advocates must be cognizant of the particular state Governor’s limitations on this portability 

provision.57 

4. Mortuary Affairs 

As with non-fatality casualties, the number of fatalities in a CBRNE event may quickly overwhelm 

state and local capabilities. The National Planning Scenarios contain fatality numbers from those 

low enough to be handled at the state level with federal, though not necessarily DoD, support (100 

fatalities from an improvised explosive), through fatality numbers that are catastrophic (over a 

quarter of a million for a improvised nuclear device, and nearly two million for pandemic 

influenza).58 As in other aspects of emergency management, primary responsibility for mortuary 

affairs (MA) operations lies at the local level, normally with the local medical examiner and/or 

coroner. The National Response Framework gives ESF-8 the responsibility for mass fatality 

management in the federal response,59 but in a catastrophic scenario, it is likely that DoD will be 

asked to provide mortuary affairs support. Types of support DoD may be asked to provide, 

potentially utilizing personnel that are not MA-skilled, may include search and recovery operations 

and transportation and storage of remains, among others.60 DoD personnel who are not MA-skilled 

may require training and oversight from DoD mortuary affairs personnel prior to engaging in 

mortuary affairs-related missions or activities.61 

Guidance on DoD personnel’s handling of human remains and their interface with the civilian 

authorities will most likely be published in the form of a “fragmentary order” (FRAGO) to an 

“execute order” (EXORD). For example, during Hurricane Katrina, DoD forces assisting in the 

recovery effort were prohibited from touching human remains; instead, DoD forces were permitted 

only to mark the locations of remains.62 Nevertheless, during operations, judge advocates should 

become familiar with the relevant state laws, regulations, and licensure requirements regarding the 

handling, transportation, and disposition of human remains, and ensure that these requirements have 

either been met or waived by appropriate authorities. Judge advocates should also be cognizant of 

56 NAT’L EMERGENCY MGMT ASS’N, Intrastate Mutual Aid Legislation, http://www.emacweb.org/?150, then click the 

link for “2004 Model Intrastate Mutual Aid Legislation” and scroll to Article VI of the template. (last visited Jul. 26, 

2011) [hereinafter Mutual Aid]. 

57 For a list of the fifteen states with intrastate mutual assistance agreements in effect or pending state congressional
 

approval, see Mutual Aid, supra note 57. 58 DEP’T OF HOMELAND SECURITY, National Planning Scenarios (6 Apr. 2006).
 

59 DEP’T OF HOMELAND SECURITY, National Response Framework, Emergency Support Function #8 (Public Health and 

Medical Services), 8-2, January, 2008. 

60 Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub 4-06, Mortuary Affairs in Joint Operations (Jun. 5, 2006), para. II-4h.
 

61 Id. 62 FORSCOM FRAGO 7 TO JTF KATRINA EXORD, 06XXXXZSEP05, para. 3.b.2. 

Chapter 3 

45 DoD Response to CBRNE 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

the various points of contact involved in mortuary affairs operations, including the local medical 

examiner/coroner, local law enforcement, and the FBI. 

Chapter 3
 

DoD Response to CBRNE 46
 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 4 

MILITARY SUPPORT TO CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 10 U.S.C. §§ 371–382 - Military Support for Civilian Law Enforcement. 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 1385 - The Posse Comitatus Act (PCA). 

•	 DoDD 5525.5 - DoD Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, January 15, 1986. 

•	 DoDD 3025.12 - Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances, February 4, 1994. 

•	 DoDD 3025.18 – Defense Support of Civil Authorities, December 29, 2010. 

•	 DoDD 5200.27 - Acquisition of Information Concerning Persons and Organizations not 

Affiliated with the Department of Defense, January 7, 1980. 

•	 DoDD 5240.01 - DoD Intelligence Activities, August 27, 2007. 

•	 SECNAVINST 5820.7C - Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, January 26, 

2006. 

•	 AFI 10-801 - Assistance to Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies, April 15, 1994. 

A. Introduction 

Military support to civilian law enforcement agencies has undergone significant growth in recent 

years. In the wake of the events of September 11, 2001, Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and the U.S.– 

Mexico border security mission beginning in June 2006, the need for support and coordination with 

local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies has increased markedly. The necessity of 

defending the homeland from emerging threats generated a renewed emphasis for the DoD’s role 

and responsibilities in domestic operations. 

U.S. military resources include specialized personnel, equipment, facilities, and training that may be 

useful to civilian law enforcement agencies. The provision of DoD resources, however, must be 

consistent with the limits Congress placed on military support to civilian law enforcement through 

the Posse Comitatus Act and other laws. Judge advocates must also weigh and advise on the 

political sensitivity of employing U.S. military forces in law enforcement roles with U.S. civilians. 

This chapter begins with a discussion of the Posse Comitatus Act. It then discusses the applicable 

provisions of the U.S. Code addressing military support to civilian law enforcement and the DoD 

regulations that implement this guidance. Chapter 6 covers counterdrug support. 

Chapter 4 

47 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

B. The Posse Comitatus Act 

The primary statute restricting military support to civilian law enforcement is the Posse Comitatus 

Act (PCA).1

 The PCA states: 

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the 

Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as 

a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or 

imprisoned not more than two years, or both. 

The PCA was enacted in 1878, primarily as a result of the military presence in the South during 

Reconstruction following the Civil War.2

 This military presence increased during the bitter 

presidential election of 1876, when the Republican candidate, Rutherford B. Hayes, defeated the 

Democratic candidate, Samuel J. Tilden, by one electoral vote. Many historians attribute Hayes’ 

victory to President Grant’s decision to send federal troops for use by U.S. Marshals at polling 

places in the states of South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida. Possibly as a result of President 

Grant’s actions, Hayes won the electoral votes of these hotly contested states.3 Consequently, the 

use of the military in this manner by a President led Congress to enact the PCA in 1878.4 

The intent of the PCA was to limit direct military involvement with civilian law enforcement, 

absent congressional or constitutional authorization, in the enforcement of the laws of the United 

States.5

 The PCA is a criminal statute and violators are subject to fine and/or imprisonment. The 

PCA does not, however, prohibit all military involvement with civilian law enforcement. A 

considerable amount of military participation with civilian law enforcement is permissible, either as 

indirect support or under one of the numerous PCA exceptions. 

In addition to the PCA, 10 U.S.C. ch. 18, Military Support for Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies6 

and Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 5525.5, DoD Cooperation with Civilian Law 

Enforcement Officials, also provide guidance in this area.7

 Both authorities, discussed below, 

1

 Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1385. The phrase “posse comitatus” is literally translated from Latin as the “power 

of the county” and is defined in common law to refer to all those over the age of 15 upon whom a sheriff could call for 

assistance in preventing any type of civil disorder. See United States v. Hartley, 796 F.2d 112, 114, n.3 (5th Cir. 1986). 2 See, e.g., Matthew C. Hammond, The Posse Comitatus Act: A Principle in Need of Renewal, 75 WASH. U. L.Q. 953, 

954 (1997) [hereinafter HAMMOND]; H.W.C. Furman, Restrictions Upon Use of the Army Imposed by the Posse 

Comitatus Act, 27 MIL. L. REV. 85, 94-95 (1960). 3 HAMMOND, supra note 2, at 954. The states of South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida sent in double returns. The 

electoral boards of these three states, which were dominated by Republicans, certified that the states had voted for 

Hayes even though it was widely believed that each state had a majority of Democrats. The Democrats sent in their 

own returns which showed that Tilden won each of the three states. Congress, which held a Republican majority, 

eventually appointed an electoral commission to recount the entire vote. Hayes was declared the winner by one 

electoral vote. Tilden won the popular vote with 51% over Hayes’ 48%. 4 Id. 5

 United States v. Red Feather, 392 F. Supp. 916, 922 (W.D.S.D. 1975).
 6 See Hayes v. Hawes, 921 F.2d 100, 103 n.3 (7th Cir. 1990) (noting that 10 U.S.C. ch. 18 specifically incorporates 18
 

U.S.C. § 1385 and provides the primary restriction on military participation in civilian law enforcement activities). 7

 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Dir. 5525.5, DoD Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials (Jan. 15, 1986) 

[hereinafter DoDD 5525.5]. 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 48 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

provide additional guidance regarding restrictions the PCA places on the military when supporting 

civilian law enforcement agencies.8 

1. To Whom Does the PCA Apply? 

On its face, the PCA only applies to active duty members of the Army and the Air Force. 

Accordingly, federal courts have consistently read the plain language of the PCA to limit its 

application to these two services.9

 However, 10 U.S.C. § 375 directs the Secretary of Defense to 

promulgate regulations that prohibit “direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air 

Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in 

such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.”10 The Secretary of Defense 

subsequently prohibited these activities in DoDD 5525.5.11 As a result, the restrictions placed on 

Army and Air Force activities through the PCA apply to the Navy and Marine Corps.12 The PCA 

does not apply to the Coast Guard unless it is operating under the command and control of the 

Department of Defense.13 

The PCA also applies to Reserve14 members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps who 

are on active duty, active duty for training, or inactive duty training in a Title 10 duty status. 

Members of the National Guard performing operational support duties,15 active duty for training, or 

inactive duty training in a Title 32 duty status are not subject to the PCA. Only when members of 

8

 Service regulations that implement DoDD 5525.5 are: U.S. Dep’t of Navy, Secretary of the Navy Instr. 5820.7C, 

Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials (26 Jan. 2006) [hereinafter SECNAVINST 5820.7C]; and U.S. 

Dep’t of Air Force, Secretary of the Air Force Instr. 10-801, Assistance to Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies (15 Apr. 

1994) [hereinafter AFI 10-801].
 9 See, e.g., United States v. Yunis, 924 F.2d 1086, 1093 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (citing congressional record that earlier
 

version of measure expressly extended PCA to the Navy but final version deleted any mention of application to the 

Navy); United States v. Roberts, 779 F. 2d 565 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 839 (1986). 10 Hayes, supra note 6, at 102–103 (10 U.S.C. § 375 makes the proscriptions of 18 U.S.C. § 1385 applicable to the 

Navy). See also Yunis, supra note 9, at 1094 (“Regulations issued under 10 U.S.C. § 375 require Navy compliance 

with the restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act . . . .”). 

11 See DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E4.3; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 8(a); AFI 10-801, supra
 

note 8, ch. 2.1. Exceptions to this prohibition as it applies to the Navy or Marine Corps may be granted by the Secretary 

of Defense or the Secretary of Navy on a case-by-case basis. See also Yunis, supra, note 10, at 1094 (affirming that
 

DoDD 5525.5 requires the Navy to comply with the restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act). 12 SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 8(b).
 13 14 U.S.C. § 2. 

14 The Reserve includes Reservists in the: Selected Reserve (SelRes), Guard/Reserve Units Individual Mobilization 

Augmentees (IMAs), Active Guard/Reserve Personnel Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), and Inactive National Guard
 

(ING). 

“The Ready Reserve consists of units or individuals, or both, liable for active duty under the provisions of 10 

U.S.C. §§ 12301–12302. The Ready Reserve is comprised of the Selected Reserve and the Individual Ready Reserve 

(IRR) / Inactive National Guard(ING).” 10 U.S.C. § 10142. 

The SelRes is comprised of: Reserve/Guard Units: Unit members are Guard/Reserve personnel assigned to Reserve 

organizations and perform in drill periods and annual training as a minimum. Individual Mobilization Augmentees 

consist of Reserve personnel assigned to Active component organizations who perform in drill periods and annual 

training. Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) is comprised of Reserve personnel on full-time active duty or full-time National 

Guard duty to provide support to the Reserve Components. All Members of the SelRes are in an active status. Id. § 

10143. 

15 32 U.S.C. § 502(f). 

Chapter 4 

49 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

the National Guard are in a Title 10 duty status (federal status) are they subject to the PCA. 

Members of the National Guard also perform additional duties in a State Active Duty (SAD) status 

and are not subject to PCA in that capacity.16 Civilian employees of DoD are only subject to the 

prohibitions of the PCA if they are under the direct command and control of a military officer.17 

Finally, the PCA does not apply to a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps when 

they are off-duty and acting in a private capacity. A service member is not in a private capacity 

when assistance is rendered to civilian law enforcement officials under the direction or control of 

DoD authorities.18 

2. Where Does the PCA Apply? 

Federal courts have generally held that the PCA places no restrictions on the use of the armed forces 

abroad.19 The courts, noting that Congress intended to preclude military involvement in domestic 

law enforcement activities, have been unwilling to apply the PCA extraterritorially.20 In addition, a 

1989 Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel Opinion concluded that the PCA and the 

restrictions in 10 U.S.C. §§ 371–381 have no extraterritorial application.21 However, in United 

States v. Kahn22 the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals indicated that the extraterritorial application 

of the PCA remains an open question.22 While recognizing that several courts held that the PCA 

only applies within the territory of the United States, the Kahn court maintained that the issue has 

not been definitively resolved, since the PCA imposes restrictions on the use of the armed forces 

abroad through 10 U.S.C. §§ 371–381.23 

Nevertheless, DoD implementing policy contained in DoDD 5525.5 applies to all members of the 

armed forces wherever located. Therefore, PCA restrictions must be considered even when 

contemplating military assistance to law enforcement overseas. In cases of compelling or 

extraordinary circumstances, the Secretary of Defense may consider exceptions to the prohibition 

against direct military assistance to law enforcement outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United 

States.24 

16 See infra ch. 10, Reserve Components - Special Issues, for a detailed discussion of National Guard and Reserve
 

status. 

17 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.2.
 18 Id. 

19 See, e.g., Chandler v. United States, 171 F.2d 921, 936 (1st Cir. 1948), cert. denied, 336 U.S. 918 (1949); D’Aquino 

v. United States, 192 F.2d 338, 351 (9th Cir. 1951), cert. denied, 343 U.S. 935 (1952). 20 Id. at 936 (The PCA was “the type of criminal statute which is properly presumed to have no extraterritorial 

application in the absence of statutory language indicating a contrary intent.”). 

21 Memorandum from Office of the Assistant Attorney General to General Brent Scowcroft, subject: Extraterritorial 

Effect of the Posse Comitatus Act (3 Nov. 1989). 

22 United States v. Kahn, 35 F.3d 426, 431 n.6 (9th Cir. 1994). 

23 Id. The Kahn court cites 10 U.S.C. § 374(b)(2)(F) (mentioning “law enforcement operations outside of the land area 

of the United States”), § 379(a) (mentioning “naval vessels at sea”), and § 379(d) (mentioning “area outside the land 

area of the United States”) as examples of limitations placed on the use of the armed forces abroad. 24 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. 8.1 provides: 

With regard to military actions conducted outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, 

however, the Secretary of Defense or the Deputy Secretary of Defense will consider for approval, on a 

case by case basis, requests for exceptions to the policy restrictions against direct assistance by 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 50 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011
 

3. When Does the PCA Apply? 

10 U.S.C. §§ 371–375 outline the restrictions of the PCA as they apply to participation by the 

military in civilian law enforcement activities. These restrictions are divided into three major 

categories: (1) use of information, (2) use of military equipment and facilities, and (3) use of 

military personnel. DoDD 5525.5 further divides the restrictions on the use of DoD personnel in 

civilian law enforcement activities into categories of direct assistance, training, expert advice, 

operation or maintenance of equipment, and other permissible assistance.25 See Figure 4-1, below. 

Use of
 

Information
 

(10 U.S.C. § 

371 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 2) 

Use of DoD
 

Personnel
 

(10 U.S.C. §§ 

371–375 & 

DoDD 5525.5, 

Encl. 4) 

Use of Military 

Equipment 

and Facilities

 (10 U.S.C. § 

372 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 3) 

Training 

(10 U.S.C. § 

373 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 4) 

Direct 

Assistance 

(10 U.S.C. §§ 

375 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 4) 

Permissible 

Direct 

Assistance
 

(10 U.S.C. §§ 

375 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 4) 

Operation and 

Maintenance 

of Equipment 

(10 U.S.C. §§ 

374 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 4) 

Expert Advice 

(10 U.S.C. §§ 

373 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 4) 

Prohibited 

Direct 

Assistance
 

(10 U.S.C. §§ 

375 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 4) 

Other
 

Permissible 

Assistance
 

(10 U.S.C. §§ 

371 & DoDD 

5525.5, Encl. 4) 

Military Emergency Civil Other Express 

Purpose Authority* Disturbance Statutory 

Doctrine (DoDD 5525.5, Statutes Authority 

(DoDD 5525.5, Encl. 4.1.2.3) (10 U.S.C. §§ (DoDD 5525.5, 

Encl. 4.1.2.1) 331-334 & Encl. 4.1.2.5) 

DoDD 5525.5, 

Encl. 4.1.2.4) 

*See DoDD 3025.12 to distinguish Emergency MACDIS Authority from Immediate Response Authority. 

Figure 4-1. PCA Restrictions Contained in 10 U.S.C. §§ 371–375 and DoDD 5525.5. 

In addition to the above categories, 10 U.S.C. §§ 376–377 provide further limitations on the 

provision of military support to civilian law enforcement. 10 U.S.C. § 376 provides an overarching 

military personnel to execute the laws. Such requests for exceptions to policy outside the territorial 

jurisdiction of the United States should be made only when there are compelling and extraordinary 

circumstances to justify them. 25 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 8; AFI 10-801, supra note 8, 

ch. 2.1. 

Chapter 4
 

51 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

restriction in the event “such support will adversely affect the military preparedness of the Un ited 

States.”26 The Secretary of Defense directed the Secretaries of the Military Departments and the 

Directors of the Defense Agencies to ensure that approval authority for the disposition27 of 

equipment to civilian law enforcement agencies is vested in those officials who can properly asses s 

the impact the disposition will have on military preparedness and national security.28 

10 U.S.C. § 377 requires civilian law enforcement agencies to reimburse DoD for support provided 

as required by the Economy Act29 or other applicable law. Civilian law enforcement agencies do 

not have to provide reimbursement for support under this statute if the support: (1) is provided in 

the normal course of military training or operations, or (2) results in a benefit to DoD that is 

substantially equivalent to that which would otherwise be obtained through military training or 

operations.30 Waiver authority for reimbursements not required by law resides with the Assi stant 

Secretary of Defense (Force Management and Personnel). This authority may be delegated to th e 

Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Directors of the Defense Agencies (or designees) o n 

matters within their approval authority.31 

For a brief recap of PCA scenarios and theapplicability of the PCA to each scenario, see Figure 4-2 

on the next page. Please note that Figure 4-2 is merely a beginning point in any potential legal 

analysis of DoD support to civilian law enforcement. 

26 10 U.S.C. § 376 (1998). This statute reflects congressional concern over the potential dilution of military readiness 

and capabilities by complying with requests for assistance from civilian law enforcement agencies. 27 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.3.1 states: “Military Departments and Defense Agencies may make equipment, 

base facilities, or research facilities available to federal, State, or local civilian law enforcement officials for law 

enforcement purposes in accordance with this enclosure.”
 28 Id. para. E.4.4; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 6(b); AFI 10-801, supra note 8, ch.3. 

29 31 U.S.C. § 1535. 

30 10 U.S.C. § 377. 

31 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.5.2; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 9; AFI 10-801, supra note 8,
 

ch. 5. 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 52 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011
 

US ARMY & AIR FORCE, TITLE 10 APPLICABILITY OF THE PCA 

Normal Status PCA applies. Title 10 personnel in normal status 

may not engage in direct law enforcement activities 

to include: Interdiction of vehicles, vessels or 

aircraft; search or seizure of civilian personnel and 

effects; arrest or detention of civilians; or as 

undercover investigators or to conduct surveillance 

for law enforcement purposes. 

In execution of a Military Purpose The PCA does not apply. This is a narrowly 

construed exception to the PCA that exempts 

activity conducted to further a military interest. 

Detailed to another federal agency subject to 

receiving agencies control (for example: Special 

Assistant United States Attorney; Special Deputy 

U.S. Marshal) 

PCA does not apply as these detailees are not 

considered part of the Army or Air Force for PCA 

purposes. 

Protection of federal property Constitutional exception to the PCA. 

Response pursuant to the Insurrection Act Statutory exception to PCA. 

Support to other Federal, state and local entities 

that are engaged in direct law enforcement 

activities 

The PCA prohibits engaging in direct law 

enforcement activities. Subject to DoD regulations 

and approvals, technical, and logistical assistance 

may be rendered. 

Response to a CBRNE attack or threat Subject to Presidential directives, DoD regulations 

and approvals, constitutional, or statutory 

exceptions to the PCA exist. 

Transfer of information regarding potential 

criminal activity obtained during military 

operations. 

PCA does not apply, but the dissemination of 

information must be conducted in accordance with 

applicable regulations. 

Off-duty Title 10 personnel PCA does not apply unless acting under the 

direction of DoD authorities. 

Homeland Defense Operations PCA does not apply to Homeland Defense 

operations. 

NATIONAL GUARD APPLICABILITY OF THE PCA 

State Active Duty (SAD) The PCA does not apply. 

Title 32 Status The PCA does not apply. 

Federalized National Guard in Title 10 Status PCA Applies. See Title 10, above. 

OTHER UNIFORMED SERVICES APPLICABILITY OF THE PCA 

United States Navy PCA does not apply by statute, but by regulation. 

United States Marine Corps PCA does not apply by statute, but by regulation 

United States Coast Guard PCA does not apply. 

United States Public Health Service PCA does not apply. 

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration PCA does not apply. 

Chapter 4
 

53 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

a. Use of DoD Information Collected During Military Operations 

The sharing of intelligence information has taken on crucial importance after September 11, 2001. 

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 tasked the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security 

with establishing procedures to share information between local, state, and federal entities.32 The 

President is to ensure that the procedures apply to “all agencies of the Federal Government.”33 

The use of information collected during military operations is codified in 10 U.S.C. § 371 and 

implemented by the Secretary of Defense in Enclosure 2 of DoDD 5525.5. Under 10 U.S.C. § 371, 

the Secretary of Defense may provide information collected during the normal course of military 

operations to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies if the information is relevant to a 

violation of federal or state law under the jurisdiction of these officials. The Secretary of Defense 

shall, to the maximum extent possible, take into account the needs of civilian law enforcement 

officials when planning and executing military training and operations. Further, § 371 provides that 

the Secretary of Defense shall ensure, to the extent consistent with national security, that 

intelligence information held by DoD and relevant to drug interdiction and other civilian law 

enforcement matters is promptly provided to the appropriate civilian law enforcement officials. 10 

U.S.C. § 371, et seq., is included at Appendix 4-2. 

Enclosure 2 of DoDD 5525.5 implements 10 U.S.C. § 371 with some additional restrictions. 

Military departments and defense agencies are generally encouraged to provide law enforcement 

officials any information collected during the normal course of military operations that may be 

relevant to a criminal violation. While the Secretary of Defense shall take into account the needs of 

civilian law enforcement officials to obtain intelligence when planning and executing military 

training and operations in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 371, the planning or creation of missions or 

training for the primary purpose of aiding civilian law enforcement official intelligence-gathering 

efforts is prohibited. Law enforcement officials may accompany regularly scheduled training 

flights as observers, but point-to-point transportation and training flights for civilian law 

enforcement officials solely for the purpose of information sharing are not authorized.34 

Additionally, the handling of all such information must comply with DoDD 5240.1, Activities of 

DoD Intelligence Components that Affect U.S. Persons;

35 DoDD 5200.27, Acquisition of 

Information Concerning Persons and Organizations not Affiliated with the Department of 

Defense;

36 and DoD 5240.1-R, Procedures Governing the Activities of DoD Intelligence 

Components that Affect United States Persons.

37 (For additional information concerning the use of 

DoD information collected during domestic operations, see chapter 9 infra.) 

32 Homeland Security Act of 2002, § 891(c), Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002) (codified primarily at 6 U.S.C.
 

§§ 101–557) [hereinafter HSA 2002]. 

33 Id. § 892(a).
 

34 See U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, REG. 4515.13-R, AIR TRANSPORTATION ELIGIBILITY (1 Nov. 1994) for guidance on this 

type of assistance. This rule does not apply to counter-drug operations. See infra ch. 6, Counterdrug Operations. 35 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5240.1, ACTIVITIES OF DOD INTELLIGENCE COMPONENTS THAT AFFECT U.S. PERSONS 

(27 Aug. 2007) [hereinafter DoDD 5240.1]. 

36 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5200.27, ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION CONCERNING PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS 

NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (7 Jan. 1980). 

37 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, REG. 5240.1-R, PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE ACTIVITIES OF DOD INTELLIGENCE 

COMPONENTS THAT AFFECT UNITED STATES PERSONS (1 Dec. 1982) [hereinafter DoDD 5240.1-R]. (As of July 2011, 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

b. Use of DoD Military Equipment and Facilities 

The loan or lease of military equipment to civilians is a difficult legal area. Each military service 

has implemented its own regulations in addition to DoDD 5525.5. The Army Regulation on point is 

AR 700-131.38 10 U.S.C. § 372 and Enclosure 3 of DoDD 5525.5 address the use of military 

equipment and facilities by civilian law enforcement authorities. Section 372(a) allows the 

Secretary of Defense to make available equipment (including associated supplies and spare parts), 

base facilities, and research facilities of the Department of Defense to any federal, state, or local 

civilian law enforcement official for law enforcement purposes. The provision of equipment and 

facilities must be made in accordance with all other applicable law. Enclosure 3 of DoDD 5525.5 

implements this provision and allows military departments and defense agencies to make 

equipment, base facilities, or research facilities available to federal, state, or local law enforcement 

authorities if the assistance does not adversely affect national security or military preparedness. 

Approval authority under DoDD 5525.5 varies based on the type of equipment requested, the reason 

for the request, and whether the equipment will be loaned39 or leased.40 The following is a list of 

the approval authorities for various types of equipment and facilities:41 

•	 Approval authority for military assistance in civil disturbances is governed by DoDD 3025.12, 

Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances (MACDIS);42 

•	 Approval authority for assistance to the government of the District of Columbia is governed by 

DoDD 5030.46, Assistance to the District of Columbia Government in Combating Crime;

43 

•	 Approval authority for training, expert advice, and personnel to operate and maintain equipment 

shall be made in accordance with Enclosure 4 of DoDD 5525.5; 

•	 Approval authority for assistance from DoD intelligence components is governed by DoDD 

5240.1 and, upon release, the revised DoD 5240.1-R;44 

•	 Approval authorities for loan or lease of other equipment or facilities are the Secretaries of the 

Military Departments and the Directors of the Defense Agencies unless the authority has been 

retained at a higher level. The authority of the Secretaries of the Military Departments and the 

Directors of the Defense Agencies may be delegated.45 

DoDD 5240.1-R is currently undergoing revision; consequently, practitioners citing this reference should first ensure 

DoDD 5240.1-R is still in effect.) 

38 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 700-131, LOAN, LEASE, AND DONATION OF ARMY MATERIEL (23 Aug. 2004). 

39 Transfers under the Economy Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1535, are limited to executive branch agencies of the federal 

government. The Economy Act does not govern loans.
 40 Leases under 10 U.S.C. § 2667 may be made to entities outside the federal Government. 

41 Since many of the applicable military regulations predate their corresponding DoD Directives, care must be
 

exercised in applying authority or procedures from military regulations without verifying currency of the information.
 42 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.12, MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR CIVIL DISTURBANCES (MACDIS) (4 Feb. 

1994)[hereinafter DODD 3025.12]. 43 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5030.46, ASSISTANCE TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA GOVERNMENT IN COMBATING 

CRIME (26 Mar. 1971). 44 See also U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 381-10, U.S. ARMY INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (3 May 2007). 

45 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E3.4; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 6(b); AFI 10-801, supra note 8, 

ch.3. See also DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.18, MILITARY DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES (29 Dec 2010), 

which withholds approval authorities for some types of support. 

Chapter 4 

55 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Of note, recently promulgated DoDD 3025.18.4.j reserves approval authority to the Secretary of 

Defense for the assistance with assets with potential lethality, e.g. arms, vessels or aircraft, or 

ammunition. (Previously, DoDD 5525.5 provided service secretaries and the directors of defense 

agencies with such authority.) 

Additionally, service regulations supply further guidance. For example, security bonds are often 

required before the loan or lease of equipment. Approval authorities may vary depending upon the 

implementing service regulation. A chart depicting Army and National Guard approval authorities 

for the loan or lease of military equipment is included at Appendix 5-7, Loan, Lease and Donation 

of Army Material. 

10 U.S.C. § 372 provides additional guidance for chemical and biological incidents. Under § 

372(b), the Secretary of Defense may make training facilities, sensors, protective clothing, antidotes 

and similar items available to federal, state, or local law enforcement or emergency response 

agencies to prepare for or respond to an emergency involving chemical or biological agents. Before 

making these materials available, however, the Secretary of Defense must make a determination 

that the items are not reasonably available from another source.46 

Further, EO 13527 Establishing Federal Capability for the Timely Provision of Medical 

Countermeasures Following a Biological Attack provides additional authority for DoD to be 

integrated into plans to support the delivery of “medical countermeasures” as part of a response to a 

biological attack. EO 13527 provides that the Secretaries of Homeland Security, Defense, and 

Health and Human Services shall develop a plan to support the U.S. Postal Service in its 

distribution of efforts, to include a “plan for supplementing local law enforcement personnel, as 

necessary and appropriate, with local federal law enforcement, as well as other appropriate 

personnel, to escort U.S. Postal workers delivering medical countermeasures.”47 

c. Participation of DoD Personnel in Civilian Law Enforcement Activities 

The federal courts have enunciated three tests to determine whether the use of military personnel 

violates the PCA.48 If any one of these three tests is met, the assistance may be considered a 

violation of the PCA.49 

•	 The first test is whether the actions of military personnel are “active” or “passive.” Only the 

active, or direct, use of military personnel to enforce the laws is a violation of the PCA.50 

46 See also 10 U.S.C. § 382 for further guidance on emergency situations involving chemical or biological weapons of 

mass destruction. 

47 EO 13527, Establishing Federal Capability for the Timely Provision of Medical Countermeasures Following a
 

Biological Attack (Dec. 30, 2009). 48 United States v. Yunis, 924 F.2d 1086, 1093 (D.C. Cir. 1991). 

49 United States v. Kahn, 35 F.3d 426, 431 (9th Cir. 1994). 

50 United States v. Rasheed, 802 F. Supp. 312, 324–25, (D. Haw. 1992) (finding that the Navy’s providing of aerial 

reconnaissance and intercepting ship, as well as providing back-up security while the ship was searched and defendants
 

arrested, was passive involvement, and consequently did not violate PCA); United States v. Red Feather, 392 F. Supp. 

916, 925 (W.D.S.D. 1975) (Activities which constitute active role in law enforcement by military are: arrest, seizure of 

evidence, search of a person, search of a building, investigation of crime, interviewing witnesses, pursuit of an escaped 

prisoner, search of an area for a suspect, and other like activities. Activities which constitute a passive role are: mere 

presence of military personnel under orders to report on necessity for military intervention, preparation of contingency
 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 56 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 The second test is whether the use of military personnel pervades the activities of civilian law 

enforcement officials. Under this test, military personnel must fully subsume the role of civilian 

law enforcement officials.51 

•	 The third test is whether the military personnel subjected citizens to the exercise of military 

power that was regulatory, proscriptive, or compulsory in nature. A power “regulatory in 

nature” is one which controls or directs. A power “proscriptive in nature” is one that prohibits 

or condemns. A power “compulsory in nature” is one that exerts some coercive force.52 

As previously mentioned, in implementing the guidance contained in 10 U.S.C., ch. 18, DoDD 

5525.5 divides the PCA restrictions regarding the use of military personnel to assist civilian law 

enforcement into five categories: (1) direct assistance; (2) training; (3) expert advice; (4) use of 

DoD personnel to operate or maintain equipment; and, (5) other permissible assistance. 

DoD personnel involvement in support to civilian law enforcement will often be subject to intense 

scrutiny, for example: the 3d U.S. Army and the 82d Airborne Division’s support in the aftermath 

of Hurricane Katrina; and the National Guard and the Special Forces assistance provided to the 

Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms during its standoff with the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas. In 

advising commanders on the permissible use of military personnel in support of civilian law 

enforcement activities, judge advocates must also consider possible legal ramifications of PCA 

violations. Evidence may be excluded from use at trial and the military may be sued.53 

(1) Direct Assistance 

(a) Prohibited Direct Assistance 

plans to be used if military intervention is ordered, advice or recommendations given to civilian law enforcement 

officials regarding tactics or logistics, presence of military personnel to deliver military equipment and supplies, training 

civilian law enforcement officials on the use and maintenance of equipment, aerial reconnaissance flights, and similar 

activities). 

51 Kahn, 35 F.3d at 431–432 (holding that Navy’s involvement in apprehension, arrest, and detention of defendant in 

international waters was passive and thus did not violate PCA because the FBI was in charge of operation at all times, 

and Navy merely provided necessary support services); Hayes v. Hawes, 921 F.2d 100, 103–104 (7th Cir. 1990) 

(actions of undercover NIS agent in acting as a drug buyer and signaling civilian law enforcement officers when the 

transaction was complete, was not so pervasive as to violate the PCA since the NIS agent did not become involved in 

the arrest and search of the defendant or the seizure and transportation of evidence); United States v. Hartley, 796 F.2d 

112, 115 (5th Cir. 1986) (Air Force allowing a U.S. Customs Service officer to ride aboard an AWACS aircraft, 

tracking defendant’s aircraft, and reporting its location to U.S. Customs Service agents on the ground was not so 

pervasive as to violate the PCA. The court further noted that these actions are specifically allowed by 10 U.S.C. §§ 371, 

374(b)). 

52 Yunis, 924 F.2d at 895–96 (The Navy’s involvement in apprehension, arrest, and transportation of defendant was not 

regulatory, proscriptive, or compulsory use of military power because defendant was under exclusive custody and 

control of FBI at all times); United States v. Casper, 541 F.2d 1275, 1278 (8th Cir. 1976) (holding that the use of 

military equipment by civilian law enforcement officers, presence of military personnel ordered there to observe and 

report whether federal military intervention would be required, drafting of contingency plans by military personnel for 

intervention of military, and aerial reconnaissance by military aircraft, was not regulatory, proscriptive, or compulsory 

use of military power which would result in violation of PCA). 

53 18 U.S.C. § 1385. 

Chapter 4 

57 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Direct assistance and participation by military personnel in the execution and enforcement of the 

law is the heart of the prohibition of the PCA.54 Impermissible direct assistance by military 

personnel in civilian law enforcement activities is codified in 10 U.S.C. § 375 and is implemented 

as DoD policy by DoDD 5525.5.55 Prohibited direct assistance by military personnel includes: 

•	 Interdiction of a vehicle, vessel, aircraft, or other similar activity; 

•	 A search or seizure; 

•	 An arrest, apprehension, stop and frisk, or similar activity; or 

•	 Use of military personnel for surveillance or pursuit of individuals, or as undercover agents, 

informants, investigators, or interrogators. 

(b) Permissible Direct Assistance 

(i) Military Purpose Doctrine 

Conversely, there are several forms of direct assistance by military personnel that are permitted 

under the PCA. The first type of permitted direct assistance is action taken for the primary purpose 

of furthering a military or foreign affairs function of the United States.56 This category is often 

referred to as the “Military Purpose Doctrine” and covers actions the primary purpose of which is to 

further a military interest. While civilian agencies can receive an incidental benefit, this section 

should be construed narrowly and cannot be used as a subterfuge for getting around the PCA. For 

example, the scheduling of a military exercise for the sole purpose of benefiting a civilian law 

enforcement agency is contrary to the intent of the military purpose doctrine. Military actions under 

the military purpose doctrine include: 

•	 Investigations and other actions related to enforcement of the Uniform Code of Military Justice 

(UCMJ); 

•	 Investigations and other actions that are likely to result in administrative proceedings by DoD, 

regardless of whether there is a related civil or criminal proceeding; 

•	 Investigations and other actions related to the commander’s inherent authority to maintain law 

and order on a military installation or facility; 

•	 Protection of classified military information or equipment; 

•	 Protection of DoD personnel, DoD equipment, and official guests of the DoD; and 

•	 Such other actions that are undertaken primarily for a military or foreign affairs purpose. 57 

It is important to note that use of military forces in the national defense of the United States is not 

support to civilian law enforcement agencies. Rather, it is homeland defense under the President’s 

authority as Commander in Chief under Article II of the Constitution. The use of military forces in 

54 Red Feather, 392 F. Supp. at 923 (W.D.S.D. 1975) (“It is clear from the legislative history that Congress intended 18 

U.S.C. § 1385 to prevent the direct, active use of federal troops to execute the laws.”). 55 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.3; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 8(b); AFI 10-801, supra note 

8, ch. 2. 

56 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.2; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 8(c)(1); AFI 10-801, supra 

note 8, ch. 2.
 57 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.2; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 8(c)(1); AFI 10-801, supra
 

note 8, ch. 2.
 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 58 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

a national defense role is not subject to the PCA and other restrictions on military participation in 

law enforcement. 

(ii) Emergency Authority 

A second type of direct assistance that may be permitted is action that falls under the “emergency 

authority” of the United States.58 These actions are taken pursuant to the inherent authority of the 

federal government under the Constitution. Actions permitted in accordance with this authority are 

those necessary to preserve public order and to carry out governmental operations within U.S. 

territorial limits, or otherwise in accordance with applicable law. In such circumstances, force may 

be used if necessary. 

“Emergency authority” is reserved for extremely unusual circumstances. Further, it will only be 

used under the guidance of DoDD 3025.12, Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances 

(MACDIS).59 DoDD 3025.12 states: “Military Forces shall not be used in MACDIS unless 

specifically authorized by the President, except in the following emergency circumstances:”60 

•	 When the use of military forces is necessary to prevent loss of life or wanton destruction of 

property, or to restore governmental functioning and public order. That “emergency authority” 

applies when sudden and unexpected civil disturbances (including civil disturbances incident to 

earthquake, fire, flood, or other such calamity endangering life) occur, if duly constituted local 

authorities are unable to control the situation and circumstances preclude obtaining prior 

authorization by the President,61 or 

•	 When duly constituted state or local authorities are unable or decline to provide adequate 

protection for federal property or federal governmental functions, federal action (including the 

use of military forces) is authorized, as necessary, to protect the federal property or functions.62 

Presidential approval is not a prerequisite to the use of military forces in these two limited 

circumstances. However, DoD officials and military commanders must use all available means to 

obtain Presidential authorization through their appropriate chains of command while applying 

emergency authority.63 

(iii) Civil Disturbance Statutes 

The third type of permitted direct assistance by military forces to civilian law enforcement is action 

taken pursuant to DoD responsibilities under the Insurrection Act, 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–334.64 This 

statute contains express exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act65 that allows for the use of military 

forces to repel insurgency, domestic violence, or conspiracy that hinders the execution of state or 

58 See 32 C.F.R. § 215.4. 

59 DoDD 3025.12, supra note 42. 60 Id. para. 4.2.2. 61 Id. para. 4.2.2.1. 62 Id. para. 4.2.2.2. 63 Id. para. 4.2.2.
 

64 For more detailed guidance, see DoDD 3025.12, para. 4.
 65 Insurrection Act, 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–334 (1998). 

Chapter 4 

59 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

federal law in specified circumstances. Actions under this authority are governed by DoDD 

3025.12. The Insurrection Act permits the President to use the armed forces to enforce the law 

when: 

•	 There is an insurrection within a state, and the state legislature (or governor if the legislature 

cannot be convened) requests assistance from the President;66 

•	 A rebellion makes it impracticable to enforce the federal law through ordinary judicial 

proceedings;67 or 

•	 An insurrection or domestic violence opposes or obstructs federal law, or so hinders the 

enforcement of federal or state laws that residents of that state are deprived of their 

constitutional rights and the state is unable or unwilling to protect these rights.68 

10 U.S.C. § 334 requires the President to issue a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse 

within a certain time before he can use the military to enforce the laws. The President issued such a 

proclamation during the Los Angeles riots in 1992. 

(iv) Other Statutory Authority 

There are several statutes, other than the Insurrection Act, that provide statutory authority for the 

military to assist civilian law enforcement agencies in executing the laws.69 These statutes permit 

direct military participation in civilian law enforcement, subject to the limitations within each 

respective statute. This section does not contain detailed guidance; therefore, specific statutes and 

other references must be consulted before determining whether military participation is permissible. 

A brief listing of these statutes includes: 

•	 Prohibited transactions involving nuclear material (18 U.S.C. § 831); 

•	 Emergency situations involving chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction (10 U.S.C. 

§ 382) (see also 10 U.S.C. §§ 175a, 229E and 233E which authorizes the Attorney General or 

other DOJ official to request SECDEF to provide assistance under 10 U.S.C. § 382); 

•	 Assistance in the case of crimes against foreign officials, official guests of the United States, 

and other internationally protected persons (18 U.S.C. §§ 112, 1116); 

•	 Protection of the President, Vice President, and other designated dignitaries (18 U.S.C. § 1751 

and the Presidential Protection Assistance Act of 1976); 

•	 Assistance in the case of crimes against members of Congress (18 U.S.C. § 351); 

•	 Execution of quarantine and certain health laws (42 U.S.C. § 97); 

•	 Protection of national parks and certain other federal lands (16 U.S.C. §§ 23, 78, 593); 

•	 Enforcement of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery and Conservation Management Act (16 U.S.C. § 

1861(a)); 

•	 Actions taken in support of the neutrality laws (22 U.S.C. §§ 408, 461–462); 

•	 Removal of persons unlawfully present on Indian lands (25 U.S.C. § 180); 

66 Id. § 331. 67 Id. § 332. 

68 Id. § 333. 69 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.2.5; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 9(c)(5).
 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 60 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 Execution of certain warrants relating to enforcement of specified civil rights laws (42 U.S.C. § 

1989); 

•	 Removal of unlawful enclosures from public lands (43 U.S.C. § 1065); 

•	 Protection of the rights of a discoverer of a guano island (48 U.S.C. § 1418); 

•	 Support of territorial governors if a civil disorder occurs (48 U.S.C. §§ 1422, 1591); and 

•	 Actions in support of certain customs laws (50 U.S.C. § 220). 

(2) Training 

The second category of restrictions on military involvement in civilian law enforcement is training. 

DoD is prohibited from providing advanced military training to civilian law enforcement 

agencies.70 “Advanced” military training is defined as high intensity training which focuses on the 

tactics, techniques, and procedures required to apprehend, arrest, detain, search for, or seize a 

criminal suspect when the potential for violent confrontation exists. Examples of advanced military 

training include: advanced marksmanship and sniper training, military operations in urbanized 

terrain (MOUT), close quarters battle/close quarters combat (CQB/CQC) training, and other similar 

training. Advanced military training does not include basic military skills such as basic 

marksmanship, patrolling, mission planning, medical, and survival skills.71 

A single general exception to the above policy is provided to the U.S. Army Military Police School 

which is authorized to train civilian law enforcement agencies in the Counterdrug Special Reaction 

Team Course, the Counterdrug Tactical Police Operations Course, and the Counterdrug 

Marksman/Observer Course. Additionally, the Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command 

(USSOCOM) may approve similar training by special operations forces on an exceptional basis.72 

10 U.S.C. § 373 permits the Secretary of Defense to make DoD personnel available for the training 

of federal, state, and local civilian law enforcement personnel in the operation and maintenance of 

equipment, including equipment provided to civilian law enforcement by DoD under 10 U.S.C. § 

372. The Secretary of Defense has implemented this guidance in DoDD 5525.5.73 

DoDD 5525.5 allows the military departments and defense agencies to provide training that is not 

“large scale or elaborate” and does not result in a direct or regular involvement of military 

personnel in activities that are traditionally civilian law enforcement operations. Training assistance 

is limited to situations where the use of non-DoD personnel would be impractical because of time or 

cost. Training assistance cannot involve military personnel in a direct role in a law enforcement 

operation, unless otherwise authorized by law, and this assistance will only be rendered at locations 

where law enforcement confrontations are unlikely.74 

(3) Expert Advice 

70 Memorandum, Deputy Secretary of Defense, subject: DoD Training Support to Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies 

(29 June 1996) [hereinafter Training Memorandum] (emphasis added).
 71 DoD may allow local police organizations and other civic organizations to use military ranges. See 10 U.S.C. § 4309 

(1998). 

72 Training Memorandum, supra note 70. 

73 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.4; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 8(c)(7).
 74 Id. 

Chapter 4 

61 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

The third category of military assistance to civilian law enforcement under DoDD 5525.5 is the 

provision of expert advice. 10 U.S.C. § 373 allows the Secretary of Defense to make DoD 

personnel available to provide civilian law enforcement agencies with expert advice relevant to the 

purposes of 10 U.S.C., ch. 18. The Secretary of Defense has directed that military departments and 

defense agencies may provide expert advice in accordance with this statute as long as military 

personnel are not directly involved in activities that are fundamentally civilian law enforcement 

operations.75 

(4) Use of DoD Personnel to Operate or Maintain Equipment 

10 U.S.C. § 374 and DoDD 5525.5, enclosure 3, address the use of DoD personnel for the operation 

or maintenance of equipment, including but not limited to equipment provided under § 372, for 

federal, state, or local law enforcement officials. 10 U.S.C. § 374(a) allows the Secretary of 

Defense to make DoD personnel available for the maintenance of equipment. 10 U.S.C. § 374(b) 

allows the Secretary of Defense, upon the request of the head of a federal law enforcement agency, 

to make DoD personnel available to operate equipment with respect to: 

•	 A criminal violation of certain specified laws;76 

•	 Assistance that such agency is authorized to provide to a state, local, or foreign government 

involved with enforcement of a similar law; 

•	 A foreign or domestic counter-terrorism operation; or 

•	 A rendition of a suspected terrorist from a foreign country to the United States to stand trial. 

DoD personnel made available under 10 U.S.C. § 374(b) may operate equipment for the following 

purposes: 

•	 Detection, monitoring, and communication of the movement of air and sea traffic; 

•	 Detection, monitoring, and communication of the movement of surface traffic outside of the 

geographic boundary of the United States and within the United States not to exceed 25 miles of 

the boundary if the initial detection occurred outside of the boundary; 

•	 Aerial reconnaissance; 

•	 Interception of vessels or aircraft detected outside the land area of the United States for the 

purposes of communicating with such vessels and aircraft to direct such vessels and aircraft to 

go to a location designated by appropriate civilian officials; 

•	 Operation of equipment to facilitate communications in connection with law enforcement 

programs specified in 10 U.S.C. § 374(4)(b)(1); 

•	 Subject to joint approval by the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General (and the 

Secretary of State in the case of a law enforcement operation outside of the land area of the 

United States): 

75 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.5; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 8(c)(6).
 

76 Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. §§ 801–904 (2006); Controlled Substances Import and Export Act, 21 U.S.C. 

§§ 951–971 (2006); Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324–1328 (2006); a law relating to the arrival or
 

departure of merchandise (as defined in § 401 of the Tariff Act of 1930) into or out of the customs territory of the 

United States; Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act, 46 U.S.C. app. § 1901 (2006); or any foreign or domestic law
 

prohibiting terrorist activities. 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 62 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 the transportation of civilian law enforcement personnel along with any other civilian or 

military personnel who are supporting or conducting a joint operation with civilian law 

enforcement personnel; 

•	 the operation of a base of operations for civilian law enforcement and supporting personnel; 

and 

•	 the transportation of suspected terrorists from foreign countries to the United States for trial 

(so long as the requesting federal law enforcement agency provides all security for such 

transportation and maintains custody over the suspect through the duration of the 

transportation). 

Additionally, DoD personnel made available to operate equipment for the purpose stated above may 

continue to operate such equipment into the land area of the United States in cases involving the 

pursuit of vessels or aircraft where the detection began outside such land area.77 Lastly, 10 U.S.C. § 

374(c) provides that the Secretary of Defense may make DoD personnel available to operate 

equipment for purposes other than those enumerated in 10 U.S.C. § 374(b)(2) so long as such 

support does not result in DoD personnel directly participating in a civilian law enforcement 

operation, unless direct participation is otherwise authorized by law.78 

Not all of the provisions of 10 U.S.C. § 374 have been implemented by the Secretary of Defense 

through DoDD 5525.5.79 Generally, under DoDD 5525.5, use of DoD personnel to operate or 

maintain, or to assist in the operation or maintenance of equipment, will be limited to situations 

where it would be impractical because of time or cost to use non-DoD personnel. The assistance 

cannot involve DoD personnel in a direct law enforcement role unless otherwise authorized by law, 

and the assistance should be provided at a location where there is not a reasonable likelihood of a 

law enforcement confrontation. Requests for the use of personnel to operate or maintain equipment 

must come from the head of the civilian law enforcement agency making the request. 10 U.S.C. § 

374, however, specifically requires that requests for the operation of equipment come from the head 

of a federal law enforcement agency.80 Use of military aircraft for point-to-point transportation and 

training flights for civilian law enforcement personnel is governed under the authority of DoD 

4515.13-R. 

Like 10 U.S.C. § 374(b), DoDD 5525.5 provides additional guidance concerning drug, customs, 

immigration, and other laws. Per DoDD 5525.5, DoD personnel made available at the request of 

the head of a civilian agency empowered to enforce the laws enumerated in 10 U.S.C. § 374(b)(2) 

may provide the following assistance: 

•	 Operate or maintain equipment to the extent that the equipment is used for monitoring and 

communicating to civilian law enforcement officials the movement of sea and air traffic with 

77 10 U.S.C. § 374(b)(3) (2006). 

78 See DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 4-8, Support to DOJ.
 79 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.6. DoDD 5525.5 was last updated in 1989 while 10 U.S.C. §§ 371–382
 

have been updated several times since 1989. Consequently, judge advocates must be aware that DoDD 5525.5 may not 

accurately reflect the state of the law regarding military support to civilian law enforcement as it stands today. 80 The U.S. Code does not mention state and local law enforcement agencies. However, under 10 U.S.C. § 

374(b)(1)(B), DoD personnel may operate equipment for a state or local law enforcement agency, but only if the request 

comes from the head of a federal law enforcement agency and this support is of the type the federal law enforcement 

agency is authorized to provide to the state or local law enforcement agency. 

Chapter 4 

63 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

respect to any criminal violation of a law enumerated in paragraph E.4.1.2.5,81 including 

communicating information concerning the relative position of civilian law enforcement 

officials and other sea and air traffic; or 

•	 Operate equipment (by, or with the assistance of DoD personnel) in an emergency situation 

outside the land area of the United States (or any Commonwealth, territory, or possession of the 

United States) as a base of operations by federal law enforcement officials to facilitate the 

enforcement of a law enumerated in 10 U.S.C. § 374(b)(1) and to transport such law 

enforcement officials in connection with such operations subject to the following limitations: 

•	 equipment operated by or with the assistance of DoD personnel may not be used to interdict 

or interrupt the passage of vessels or aircraft, except when DoD personnel are otherwise 

authorized to take such action with respect to civilian law enforcement operations; and 

•	 there must be a joint determination by the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General 

that an emergency situation exists. An emergency situation may be determined to exist for 

purposes of this subparagraph only when the size and scope of the suspected criminal 

activity in a given situation poses a serious threat to the United States. This emergency 

authority may be used only with respect to large-scale criminal activity at a particular point 

in time or over a fixed period. It does not permit use of this authority on a routine or 

extended basis. 

The key authorities addressing requests for maintenance and operation of equipment in support of 

law enforcement agencies investigating drug, customs, and immigration violations are different. 

Under 10 U.S.C. § 374, requests for DoD personnel to maintain equipment may come from federal, 

state, or local authorities; however, requests for DoD personnel to operate equipment must come 

from the head of a federal law enforcement agency. 

DoDD 5525.5, on the other hand, does not distinguish between a request for personnel to operate or 

to maintain equipment. DoDD 5525.5 only requires that the request come from the head of a 

civilian law enforcement agency charged with enforcing specified federal laws. 

Also, the purposes listed in 10 U.S.C. § 374(b)(2) for which DoD personnel may operate equipment 

are more expansive than those listed in DoDD 5525.5. Operations such as aerial reconnaissance 

and intercepting vessels outside the land area of the United States in order to direct them to a certain 

area are permitted under § 374, but not under DoDD 5525.5. A judge advocate must be aware of 

these discrepancies and work through the requirements closely in order to provide the best legal 

advice. 

(5) Other Permissible Assistance 

The last category of military assistance to civilian law enforcement under DoDD 5525.5 is the 

overarching category of “other permissible assistance.”82 Under 10 U.S.C. § 371, the transfer of 

81 The laws enumerated in DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.2.5 pertaining to the operation and maintenance of 

equipment are the same laws listed in paragraph 3.c(1)(b)(iv) Other Statutory Authority, above, regarding the use of the 

DoD personnel to enforce laws under specific statutory authority. 

82 DoDD 5525.5, supra note 7, para. E.4.1.7; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 8, para. 9(d); AFI 10-801, supra note 

8, ch. 4. 

Chapter 4 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 64 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

information acquired in the normal course of military operations to civilian law enforcement 

agencies is not a violation of the PCA.83 Additionally, DoDD 5525.5 provides that other actions 

which are approved by the Secretaries of the Military Departments or the Directors of Defense 

Agencies that do not subject civilians to the regulatory, prescriptive, or compulsory use of military 

power are not violations of the PCA. 

83 Transfer of information is discussed in greater detail in this chapter at B.3.a., Use of DoD Information Collected 

During Military Operations. 

Chapter 4 

65 Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Chapter 4
 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement
 66 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 5 

CIVIL DISTURBANCE OPERATIONS1 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 331–335 - The Insurrection Act 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2667 - Leases: Non-Excess Property of Military Departments 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 231 - Civil Disorders 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 1382 - Entering Military, Naval, or Coast Guard Property 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 1385 - The Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) 

•	 28 U.S.C. § 1346, 2671–2680 - The Federal Tort Claims Act 

•	 31 U.S.C. § 1535 - Agency Agreements 

•	 Executive Order 12656 - Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities 

•	 EO 13527 - Establishing Federal Capability for the Timely Provision of Medical 

Countermeasures Following a Biological Attack, December 30, 2009. 

•	 DoDD 3025.12 - Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances, February 4, 1994. 

•	 DoDD 3025.18 - Defense Support of Civil Authorities, December 29, 2010. 

•	 DoDD 5111.13 - Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security 

Affairs, January 16, 2009. 

•	 DoDD 5525.5 - DoD Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, January 15, 1986. 

•	 CJCSI 3121.01B, Standing Rules of Engagement/Standing Rules For the Use of Force for U.S. 

Forces (S), June 13, 2005. 

•	 CJCSI 3110.07C, Guidance Concerning Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear 

Defense and Employment of RIOT Control Agents and Herbicides (S), November 22, 2006. 

•	 Joint Pub 3-28 - Civil Support, September 14, 2007. 

•	 Army Regulation 700-131 - Loan and Lease of Army Materiel, August 23, 2004. 

•	 National Guard Regulation 500-1/ANGI 10-8101 - National Guard Domestic Operations, June 

13, 2008. 

•	 FM 3-07 - Stability Operations and Support Operations, October 6, 2008. 

•	 FM 3-19.15 - Civil Disturbances, April 18, 2005. 

•	 USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502 (S) 

•	 USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3600 (S) 

•	 USPACOM CONPLAN 7502 (S) 

A. Introduction 

Within civilian communities in the United States, the local government and the state have the 

primary responsibility for protecting life and property and maintaining law and order. Generally, 

federal forces are employed in support of state and local authorities to enforce civil law and order 

only when circumstances arise that overwhelm the resources of state and local authorities. This 

basic policy reflects the Founding Fathers’ hesitancy to raise a standing army and their desire to 

1

 The National Response Framework (Jan. 2008) uses the phrase Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA). A 

copy of the National Response Framework is located at DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 2-18. 

Chapter 5 

67 Civil Disturbance Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

render the military subordinate to civilian authority.2

 The basic policy is rooted in the Constitution3 

and laws of the United States,4

 and allows for exception only under extreme, emergency conditions. 

The Constitution guarantees to the states that the Federal Government will aid in suppressing civil 

disturbances (Civil Disturbance Operations (CDO)) and empowers Congress to create laws that 

provide Federal forces for that purpose.5

 Other emergency conditions, which are outside the 

constitutionally and congressionally prescribed conditions, may also allow for CDO. 

B. Civil Disturbance Statutes 

Title 10, Chapter 15 of the United States Code,6

 entitled “Insurrection,” allows the use of federal 

forces to restore order during times of civil disturbance. DoD and the courts use one phrase, “civil 

disturbance,” to encompass the various situations allowing the use of military assistance under the 

Insurrection Act. 

DoD defines civil disturbances as “group acts of violence and disorders prejudicial to public law 

and order in the fifty States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, U.S. 

possessions and territories, or any political subdivision thereof.”7 The phrase “civil disturbance” 

includes all circumstances requiring the use of force under the conditions set out in the Insurrection 

Act. The Insurrection Act is the authority that allows the President, in certain domestic conditions, 

to use federal forces under DoDD 3025.12.8

 Courts use similar language when defining 

“insurrection.”9 

2

 Among the several grounds stated in the Declaration of Independence for severing ties with Great Britain includes 

that the King “has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our Legislature . . . [and] 

has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.” THE DECLARATION OF 

INDEPENDENCE, para. 13, available at http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/DeclarInd.html. This feeling 

resurfaced during the Constitutional Convention where Maryland Delegate Luther Martin recorded the general 

sentiment, “When a government wishes to deprive its citizens of freedom and reduce them to slavery, it generally makes 

use of a standing army.” Luther Martin’s Letter on the Federal Convention of 1787 (1787), in 1 DEBATES IN THE 

SEVERAL STATES CONVENTIONS ON THE ADOPTION OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION (ELLIOT’S DEBATES), 344, 372 

(Jonathan Elliot ed., 1836) available at http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwed.html. 3

 The Constitution divides authority over the Armed Forces between the President as Commander in Chief, U.S. 

CONST. art. II, § 2, para. 1, and Congress, which has the authority to “raise and support Armies . . . provide and maintain 

a Navy, . . . [and] make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.” Id. art. I, § 8, para. 11. 4 See, e.g., Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1385. The Posse Comitatus Act is discussed fully infra at Chapter 4, 

Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement. 

5

 U.S. CONST. art. I, § 8, para. 15, art. II, § 2, and art. IV, § 4. These sections provide authority to Congress and the 

President to support the States by providing forces to repel an invasion and suppress domestic violence. 6 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335. 

7

 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.12, MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR CIVIL DISTURBANCES (MACDIS) (4 Feb. 1994) 

[hereinafter DODD 3025.12]. 8 Id. para. E.2.1.4 See also U.S. JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, JOINT PUBLICATION 3-28, CIVIL SUPPORT, Part II – Terms 

and Definitions (14 September 2007) [hereinafter JP 3-28]. 

9 See e.g., In re Charge to Grand Jury, 62 F. 828 (N.D. Ill. 1894) (The open and active opposition of a number of 

persons to the execution of the laws of the United States, of so formidable a nature as to defy for the time being the 

authority of the government, constitutes an insurrection, though not accompanied by bloodshed, and not of sufficient 

magnitude to render success probable.) (An insurrection is a rising against civil or political authority; the open and 

active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of law in city or state.). 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 68 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Under the Insurrection Act, federal forces may be used to restore law and order. As the use of 

federal forces to quell civil disturbances is expressly authorized by statute, the proscriptions of the 

Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) are inapplicable.10 The Insurrection Act permits the commitment of 

U.S. forces by the President under three circumstances: 

• To support a request from a state or territory; 

• To enforce federal authority; or 

• To protect constitutional rights.11 

1. Supporting a State or Territorial Request 

The Federal Government has an obligation to protect every state in the union, upon request, from 

domestic violence.12 Pursuant to this obligation, Congress included in the Insurrection Act a 

provision allowing the President to use federal forces to assist state governments. 10 U.S.C. § 331 

provides: 

Whenever there is an insurrection in any state against its government, the President 

may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be 

convened, call into federal service such of the militia of the other states, in the 

number requested by that state, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers 

necessary to suppress the insurrection.13 

A request from a state for the assistance of federal armed forces is made to the President. The 

President has designated the Attorney General of the United States to receive and coordinate 

preliminary requests from the states for federal military assistance under this provision.14 (See 

DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 2-4, Executive Order 12656, Emergency Preparedness.) Should 

a request for assistance be presented to a local commander, the commander should inform the 

person making the request to address the request to the Attorney General. The commander must 

also inform the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the request and all known material facts 

pertaining to the request.15 

10 Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1385, makes it unlawful to use any part of the Army or Air Force in a civilian law 

enforcement capacity to execute local, state, or federal laws. The language of the act itself specifies that activities 

expressly authorized by the Constitution or by statute are exempt from the act’s restrictions. For a more complete 

discussion of the Posse Comitatus Act, see infra Chapter 4, Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement. 11 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335. 12 U.S. CONST. art. IV, § 4. 

13 10 U.S.C. § 331. 14 See Exec. Order No. 12,656, 53 Fed. Reg. 47,491, § 1101(8) (18 Nov. 1998) [hereinafter EO 12,656]; DODD
 

3025.12, supra note 7, para. 4.6.1; JP 3-28, supra note 8, para. 1b (1). A copy of the Executive Order is located at 

DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 2-4. 

15 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5111.13, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HOMELAND DEFENSE AND 

AMERICAS’ SECURITY AFFAIRS, (16 Jan. 2009)[hereinafter DoDD 5111.13], appointed Assistant Secretary of Defense 

for Homeland Defense & Americas’ Security Affairs as DoD Executive Agent and transferred the Director of Military 

Support function from the Army to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff . 

Chapter 5 

69 Civil Disturbance Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Prior to a state requesting assistance in the form of federal military forces, all local and state 

resources, including the National Guard in State Active Duty status,16 should have been brought to 

bear on the civil disturbance.17 

On 1 May 1992, pursuant to the Insurrection Act, California Governor Pete Wilson requested 

federal military support from President George H.W. Bush to assist with restoring law and order in 

Los Angeles. Governor Wilson advised President Bush that the domestic violence exceeded the 

capabilities of available law enforcement resources, including National Guard forces mobilized a 

day earlier.18 In accordance with the order of President Bush, the Secretary of Defense ordered the 

federalization of the California National Guard and the deployment of Soldiers of the 7th Infantry 

Division from Fort Ord and Marines from Camp Pendleton to assist in restoring order in Los 

Angeles.19 (See DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 5-9, Presidential Proclamation and Executive 

Order 12804; App. 5-10, Acting SECDEF Memorandum “Execution of Operations to Assist in 

Restoring Civil Order to Los Angeles and Other Districts in California; and App. 5-11, JTF LA 

Report.) 

2. Enforcing Federal Authority 

The President has a constitutional duty to see that the laws of the United States are faithfully 

executed.20 Within the Insurrection Act, Congress gave the President the authority to commit the 

U.S. military to enforce federal law.21 10 U.S.C. § 332 provides: 

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or 

assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it 

impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any state or territory by the 

ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into federal service such of the 

militia of any state, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to 

enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.22 

During the 1950s and 1960s, this statute was used to enforce public school desegregation in 

Arkansas23 and Alabama24 and to control civil rights protests in Mississippi25 and Alabama.26 

16 See infra Chapter 10, Reserve Components - Special Issues, which discusses the mobilization and activation of 

National Guard forces. 

17 See NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, REG. 500-1/ANGI 10-8101, NATIONAL GUARD DOMESTIC OPERATIONS, PARA. 4-2d 

(13 June 2008) (which anticipates that state national guard forces would exercise their primary responsibility for 

providing military assistance to state and local government agencies while in state active duty status). 18 Proclamation No. 6427, 57 Fed. Reg. 19,359 (May 5, 1992). 

19 Exec. Order No. 12,804, 57 Fed. Reg. 19,361 (May 5, 1992). 

20 U.S. CONST. art. II, § 3. 21 10 U.S.C. § 332 (2006). 22 Id. 

23 See Exec. Order No. 10,730, 22 Fed. Reg. 7,628 (Sept. 24, 1957) (Army and Air National Guard units were 

federalized to remove obstructions to justice in respect to enrollment and attendance at public schools in Little Rock, 

Arkansas.). 

24 See Exec. Order No. 11,118, 28 Fed. Reg. 9,863 (Sept. 10, 1963) (Army and Air National Guard units were 

federalized to remove obstructions to justice in respect to enrollment and attendance at public schools in Alabama.). 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 70 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

3. Protecting Constitutional Rights 

Citizens of the United States are guaranteed equal protection under the law.27 The final 

congressional grant of authority to the President for the use of the U.S. military during times of 

insurrection is for the protection of citizens in states that cannot protect the constitutional rights of 

its citizens.28 10 U.S.C. § 333 states: 

The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other 

means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a state, any 

insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it— 

(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that state, and of the United States within 

the state, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, 

immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the 

constituted authorities of that state are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, 

privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or 

(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes 

the course of justice under those laws. In any situation covered by clause (1), the 

state shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by 

the Constitution.29 

Under 10 U.S.C. § 333, President Kennedy sent military troops to Alabama in April 1963 during the 

civil rights protests in Birmingham, Alabama.30 

C. Procedural Issues 

Prior to committing federal troops under the Insurrection Act, the President must issue a 

proclamation demanding that the insurgents cease and desist all acts of violence and retire 

peaceably within a prescribed time.31 10 U.S.C. § 334 states, 

Whenever the President considers it necessary to use the militia or the armed forces 

under this chapter, he shall, by proclamation, immediately order the insurgents to 

disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time. 

25 See Exec. Order No. 11,053, 27 Fed. Reg. 9,681 (Sept. 30, 1962) (Army and Air National Guard units federalized to 

enforce federal court orders issued in Mississippi.). 

26 See Exec. Order No. 11,111, 28 Fed. Reg. 5,709 (June 11, 1963) (Army and Air National Guard units federalized to
 

remove obstructions of justice and to suppress unlawful assemblies, conspiracies, and domestic violence that opposes 

the laws of Alabama.). 

27 U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 1 which states in part “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the 

privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
 

property, without due process of law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction equal protection of the laws.” 28 10 U.S.C. § 333 (2006). 

29 Id. 

30 See Alabama v. U.S., 373 U.S. 545 (1963). 31 10 U.S.C. § 334. 

Chapter 5 

71 Civil Disturbance Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

If the Presidential Proclamation does not end the disturbance, the President will issue an Executive 

Order to the Secretary of Defense directing the Secretary to use such of the armed forces as are 

necessary to restore order.32 Decisions of the President to issue Presidential Proclamations and 

Executive Orders pursuant to the Insurrection Act are final33 and cannot be compelled by the 

courts.34 An example of such a Presidential Proclamation and Executive Order (for the deployment 

of military forces to Los Angeles during the 1992) can be found in the 2011 Documentary 

Supplement at Appendices 5-9 through 5-11. 

D. DoD Considerations concerning the Insurrection Act 

Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 3025.18, Defense Support of Civil Authorities, requires 

all requests for military support be evaluated against six criteria prior to the decision to employ 

forces. 

• Legality - compliance with the law. 

• Lethality - potential use of lethal force by or against DoD forces. 

• Risk - safety of DoD forces. 

• Cost - who pays, impact on DoD budget. 

• Appropriateness - whether DoD is the proper source. 

• Readiness - impact on DoD’s ability to perform its primary mission.35 

The decision to employ armed forces is made at the cabinet level in coordination with the President, 

the Secretary of Defense, and the Attorney General. However, the above-criteria are helpful to 

local commanders and their judge advocates when forwarding formal assistance requests to higher 

headquarters for consideration. 

The Secretary of Defense retains approval authority for all military support in response to civil 

disturbances.36 However, the Secretary of Defense, through the Secretary of the Army—as the 

“DoD Executive Agent,” has delegated certain authority to plan for and commit DoD resources in 

response to requests from civil authorities. 

32 See Exec. Order No. 10,703, 22 Fed. Reg. 7,628 (Sept. 24, 1957) (order authorizing use of military forces for 

desegregation in Arkansas); Exec. Order No. 11,053, 27 Fed. Reg. 9,681 (Sept. 30, 1962) (order authorizing use of 

military forces during riots in Mississippi); Exec. Order No. 11,111, 28 Fed. Reg. 5,709 (June 11, 1963) (order 

authorizing use of military forces during riots in Alabama); Exec. Order No. 11,118, 28 Fed. Reg. 9,863 (Sept. 10, 

1963) (order authorizing use of military forces for desegregation in Alabama). 33 See, e.g., Monarch Ins. Co. of Ohio v. District of Columbia, 353 F. Supp. 1249 (D.D.C. 1973), aff’d, 497 F.2d 683, 

aff’d, 497 F.2d 684 (D.C. Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1021 (1974), aff’d, 497 F.2d 685 (D.C. Cir. 1974) (decision 

whether to use troops or militia to quell civil disorder is exclusively within the province of the President, and 

presidential discretion in exercising powers granted in U.S. Constitution Article 2, § 2 and Article 4, § 4, and the 

Insurrection Act is not subject to judicial review). 

34 See Consolidated Coal and Coke Co. v. Beale et al., 282 F. 934 (S.D. Ohio 1922) (ruling that court could not compel 

President to issue Proclamation or exercise discretion under Insurrection Act). 35 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.18, DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES, para. 4.e (29 Dec 2010) [hereinafter 

DODD 3025.18]; see also supra note 7.
 

36 DODD 3025.18, supra note 35, para. 4.j.1, retains approval authority for civil disturbance operations to no lower than
 

the Secretary of Defense level. 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 72 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

E. Other Authority 

In addition to the Insurrection Act, authority to use federal troops in a law enforcement capacity to 

quell civil disturbances can be found in two other major areas.37 

1. Protection of Federal Property Authority 

The United States has the right to protect federal property or functions through the use of federal 

armed forces. The use of federal armed forces in this manner is warranted only where the need for 

protection exists, and the duly constituted State or local civil authorities cannot or will not give 

adequate protection.38 A military installation commander, exercising “inherent authority,”39 may 

take such actions as are reasonably necessary and lawful to protect military installations. This could 

include ejection from the installation or denial of access to an installation of those who threaten or 

are involved in civil disturbances.40 

2. Emergency Authority 

Per DoDD 3025.18, Defense Support of Civil Authorities, responsible DoD officials and 

commanders may approve the use of military forces in a law enforcement capacity to support 

civilian authorities, during sudden and unexpected civil disturbances beyond the control of local 

civilian authorities when circumstances preclude seeking prior approval from the President. The 

use of military forces must be necessary to prevent the loss of life or wanton destruction of 

property, or to restore governmental functioning and public order, or when duly constituted federal, 

state, or local authorities are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or 

federal government functions.41 This emergency provision should be used with great caution. The 

37 In addition to these two major areas, there are other numerous statutory authorizations that allow the use of troops in
 

a law enforcement capacity to quell various civil disturbances. See infra Chapter 4, Military Support to Civilian Law 

Enforcement, which discusses the Posse Comitatus Act and its exceptions. 38 DODD 3025.12, supra note 7, para. 4.2.2.2.
 

39 The courts have approved the theory of a commander’s inherent authority, that is, authority not found in statute or
 

regulation. See Cafeteria and Restaurant Workers Union v. McElroy, 367 U.S. 886, 893 (1961) (commanders have
 

“historically unquestioned power” to exclude persons from their installations); Greer v. Spock, 424 U.S. 828, 840
 

(1976) (“There is nothing in the Constitution that disables a military commander from acting to avert what he perceives 

to be a clear danger to the loyalty, discipline, or morale of troops on the base under his command.”).
 40 18 U.S.C. § 1382 states:
 

Whoever, within the jurisdiction of the United States, goes upon any military, naval, or Coast Guard 

reservation, post, fort, arsenal, yard, station, or installation, for any purpose prohibited by law or 

lawful regulation; or Whoever reenters or is found within any such reservation, post, fort, arsenal, 

yard, station, or installation, after having been removed therefrom or ordered not to reenter by any 

officer or person in command or charge thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more 

than six months, or both. 

From this federal trespass statute, courts have inferred military power of apprehension of civilians trespassing on federal 

installations. See United States v. Banks, 539 F.2d 14 (9th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1024 (1976). For a 

complete analysis of law enforcement authority over civilians, see Major Matthew Gilligan, Opening the Gate?: An 

Analysis of Military Law Enforcement Authority over Civilian Lawbreakers on and off the Federal Installation, 161 

Mil. L. Rev. 1 (1999). 

41 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.18, DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES, para. 4.i.1–2; 3025.12, supra note 

7, para. 4.2.2.1; U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5525.5, DOD COOPERATION WITH CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT 

OFFICIALS, PARA. E.4.1.2.3.1 (15 JAN. 1986) [hereinafter DODD 5525.5]. 

Chapter 5 

73 Civil Disturbance Operations 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

authority granting the use of federal forces in this manner clearly states that it would be difficult to 

justify such action, without prior approval, while communications facilities are operating.42 

Historically, authority in these circumstances has been granted to officers of the “active Army in 

command of troops” allowing them to take prompt and vigorous action designed to preserve law 

and order and to protect life and property until they receive instruction from a higher 

headquarters.43 Oral requests from local officials to a commander should be reduced to writing as 

soon as possible. An officer exercising emergency authority must report the facts surrounding the 

request, the command’s response, and any other relevant information through the chain of command 

to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Director of Military Support (JDOMS) with copy 

to USNORTHCOM Domestic Warning Center at (719) 554-2361 by the most expeditious means of 

communication available. If the commander has not received a written request at the time he 

forwards the request to JDOMS, the written request should be forwarded to JDOMS as soon as it is 

available. 

F. Responsibilities and Relationships of Parties Involved in Civil Disturbance Operations 

1. Attorney General 

The Department of Justice is the primary federal agency for coordinating the Federal Government 

response to restore law and order.44 As the head of the Department of Justice, the Attorney General 

is the chief civilian official responsible for the Federal Government’s activities in civil disturbances. 

The Attorney General provides early threat assessments and warnings to the Department of Defense 

to support civil disturbance planning. States request the assistance of federal forces through the 

Attorney General, who also advises the President on the use of federal military forces to restore law 

and order. The Attorney General coordinates the activities of federal law enforcement agencies 

with those of the local and state agencies in an area faced with a civil disturbance. Finally, the 

Attorney General appoints the Senior Civilian Representatives of the Attorney General (SCRAG), 

who will be located in each city where federal forces are committed. 

2. Senior Civilian Representative of the Attorney General 

Appointed by the Attorney General, the SCRAG is the Attorney General’s on-scene agent. The 

SCRAG is responsible for the coordination of effort of all federal agencies involved in the civil 

disturbance operation with the efforts of state and local agencies engaged in restoring law and order. 

The SCRAG has the authority to assign missions to federal military forces and the authority to 

resolve disputes arising between local law enforcement agencies and the joint task force commander 

concerning the types of missions military forces may undertake. 

3. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs 

The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs 

(ASD(HD&ASA)) acts as the principal point of contact between DoD and the Department of 

42 DODD 3025.12, supra note 7, para. 4.2.2., JP 3-28, supra note 8, chapter II, para. 3. 

43 JP 3-28, supra note 8, Chapter III; U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, FIELD MANUAL 3-19.15, CIVIL DISTURBANCES, para B-45
 

(18 Apr. 2005) [hereinafter FM 3-19.15].
 44 EO 12,656, supra note 14, § 1101(3), 1101(8). 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 74 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Justice for Civil Disturbance Operations.45 ASD(HD&ASA) is responsible for all training, 

planning, and operations relating to the employment of any military resources in the event of a civil 

disturbance.46 

4. Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Director of Military Support (JDOMS) 

The Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (JDOMS) is the action agent within DoD with responsibility for 

planning, coordinating, and directing the commitment of all designated federal military resources 

during civil disturbance operations. JDOMS coordinates with the supported Combatant 

Commander (CC) for a civil disturbance operation. JDOMS is the point of contact within DoD for 

civil disturbance matters.47 

5. Combatant Commanders, U.S. Northern Command and U.S. Pacific Command 

The Combatant Commanders of U.S. Northern Command (CDRUSNORTHCOM) and U.S. Pacific 

Command (CDRUSPACOM) have responsibility for planning and executing civil disturbance plans 

within their areas of operation. In total, these areas cover the 50 states, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin 

Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and all U.S. territories, possessions, and territorial waters.48 The 

Combatant Commander, in coordination with the SCRAG, will determine the organization and 

forces required to accomplish the civil disturbance mission. 

CDRUSNORTHCOM is responsible for federal civil disturbance operations in the 48 contiguous 

states, Alaska, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

CDRUSPACOM is responsible for civil disturbance operations in Hawaii, and U.S. possessions and 

territories in the Pacific.49 

6. Commander, U.S. Army North 

U.S. Army North (ARNORTH) is currently the lead operational authority for federal civil 

disturbance response within the 48 contiguous states. The Commander, ARNORTH, designates a 

Commander, Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force, receives civil disturbance units, ensures 

preparedness, and deploys forces to the objective area. 

7. Commander, Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force 

The Commander of the Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force is the Commander for all federal forces, 

including National Guard forces in Title 10 status, in a civil disturbance area of operations. He is 

45 DoDD 5111.13, supra note 15. 46 Id. 47 Id.; DODD 3025.12, supra note 7, para. 5.6.4; see also FM 3-19.15, supra note 43, Appendix B.
 48 DODD 3025.12, supra note 7, para. 4.3.3.
 

49 Id. DODD 3025.12 was promulgated in 1994 and assigned responsibilities based on the geographical responsibilities 

of the Combatant Commands applicable at the time of promulgation. Pursuant to CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF,
 

UNIFIED COMMAND PLAN 2002 (30 Apr. 2002) (classified Secret) [hereinafter UCP 02], the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of
 

Staff (CJCS), reassigned geographical responsibilities for the Commanders of the Combatant Commands. This change
 

is not reflected in DoDD 3025.12, which has not been updated.
 

Chapter 5 

75 Civil Disturbance Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

the DoD representative in the civil disturbance area and performs civil disturbance missions 

assigned by the SCRAG. Civilian officials remain in charge of civil disturbance operations. 

8. National Guard Bureau 

The Chief of the National Guard Bureau (CNGB) is the channel of communication for all National 

Guard matters between (1) the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the 

DoD Components, and the Departments of the Army and Air Force and (2) the States.50 In that 

capacity, CNGB facilitates and deconflicts the use of National Guard forces to ensure that adequate 

and balanced forces are available for domestic and foreign military operations.51 

9. The National Guard 

National Guard units have primary responsibility to respond to a civil disturbance, and will initially 

deploy in a State Active Duty (SAD) status or under Title 32.52 In either capacity, they are not 

subject to the prohibitions of the PCA and can freely support state or federal law enforcement 

missions.53 National Guard forces remain under the command of state NG officers, and missions 

are conducted through the NG chain of command, after coordination with civil authorities. NG 

operations are normally conducted according to the unity of effort paradigm. In extreme 

circumstances, National Guard units may be federalized under Title 10 pursuant to a Presidential 

order.54 Once federalized, the NG conducts its mission in accordance with federal law and 

CONPLANs, as discussed in the next section. 

The NG’s use of force while in SAD or Title 32 status is governed by the laws of the state where the 

operation occurs. Multi-state operations therefore may involve separate “Rules for the Use of 

Force” (RUF) for each receiving state. One instance where a regional RUF for Title 32 NG forces 

occurred was during Operation Jump Start, a border security mission conducted during 2006– 

2007;55 another instance where a regional RUF was signed occurred during the POTUS 

Inauguration Ceremony in 2009.56 

50 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5105.77, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU (NGB) (21 May 2008) [hereinafter DODD
 

5105.77].
 51 Id. para. 5.1.11.2.
 52 With SecDef approval, the National Guard may conduct operational missions under 32 U.S.C. § 502(f)(2)
 

“operational support” authority. 

53 See infra, Chapter 2, Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement, for a complete discussion on the Posse 

Comitatus Act. 

54 See infra Chapter 10, Reserve Components, for a complete discussion of National Guard status.
 55 See Memorandum of Agreement Between the States of Arizona, California, New Mexico, Texas, and the Department
 

of Defense, subj: OPERATION JUMP START (June 2006). 

56 See Greg Rudl, Guardmembers flow in for inauguration support; first stop – in-processsing, NAT’L GUARD (Jan. 16, 

2009), http://www.ng.mil/news/archives/2009/01/011809-Inprocess.aspx. 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 76 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

G. The Department of Defense Civil Disturbance Plans 

Formerly, DoD’s Civil Disturbance Operations (CDO) plan was known as “GARDEN PLOT.”57 

Since the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and USNORTHCOM however, DoD 

has delegated to geographic combatant commanders responsibility for developing CDO 

Contingency Plans (CONPLANs). These geographic commanders’ CONPLANs provide guidance 

and direction for planning, coordinating, and executing military operations during domestic civil 

disturbances. 

1. Civil Disturbance Operations Mission 

Broadly stated, the CDO mission assists civil authorities in restoring law and order in the United 

States and its territories.58 This mission statement, while not duplicating the language in the 

Insurrection Act allowing for the use of federal forces to “suppress” insurrection, provides wide 

latitude to the President to use federal forces to assist civil law enforcement in “restoring” law and 

order. 

The restoration of law and order must be distinguished from the preservation of law and order.59 

CDO mission statements do not allow the joint civil disturbance task force commander to undertake 

preservation missions.60 It is generally agreed that missions to restore law and order include 

dispersing unauthorized assemblages, patrolling disturbed areas, maintaining essential 

transportation and communications systems, setting up roadblocks, and cordoning off areas.61 Care 

should be taken before a military commander accepts missions that are routine maintenance of civil 

order. 

2. Combatant Commanders’ CONPLANs 

The CONPLANs provide the basis for all preparation, deployment, employment, and redeployment 

of Department of Defense component forces, including National Guard forces called to active 

federal service, for use in domestic civil disturbance operations, in support of civil authorities as 

directed by the President.62 The concept of a civil disturbance operation is multi-phased: Phase 0, 

Shape; Phase I, Anticipate; Phase II, Respond (deployment can occur in either Phase I or Phase II); 

Phase III, Operate; Phase IV, Stabilize; and Phase V, Transition (redeployment). Prior to 

57 GARDEN PLOT was published in 1991. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Northern 

Command required a change to the plan. The UCP in 2002 moved this responsibility to the regional combatant 

commands. Changes to the UCP in 2008 resulted in USNORTHCOM and USPACOM having sole responsibility for 

CDO planning. Thus, GARDEN PLOT has been replaced by COCOM CONPLANs for the respective theaters. 58 JP 3-28, supra note 8, para. 3(1)(b). 

59 The preservation of law and order is the responsibility of state and local governments and law enforcement 

authorities. DODD 3025.12, supra note 7, para. 4.1.3; FM 3-19.15, supra note 47, I-8, para. 5(a)(2).
 

60 See DODD 3025.12, supra note 7, para. 4.2.7, which states, “The DoD Components shall not take charge of any
 

function of civil government unless absolutely necessary under conditions of extreme emergency. Any commander
 

who is directed, or undertakes, to control such functions shall strictly limit military actions to the emergency needs, and 

shall facilitate the reestablishment of civil responsibility at the earliest time possible.” 

61 FM 3-19.15, supra note 47. 

62 In most of the United States, USNORTHCOM CONPLAN directs how the Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force would
 

plan, train, and conduct operations. See NORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502 (S) (limdis) [hereinafter NORTHCOM
 

CONPLAN 3502]. To review this CONPLAN, contact the NORTHCOM Staff Judge Advocate. 

Chapter 5 

77 Civil Disturbance Operations 
PRESCRIBED LEVELS OF PREPAREDNESS FOR A CIVIL DISTURBANCE CONTROL MISSION

CIDCON 5

Unit in n ormal 

train ng and 

prep ared ness

statu s

MACOM 

comman der

wit h SCRAG

deter m nes

or ganizatio n an d

f orces requ r ed for c vil

distur bance 

m ission

FORSCOM

(CONUS)

or ap propr ate

comman der

OCONUS

n ominate units 

and Jo nt Civi 

Distu rbance

Task Force 

Commander

ASD (HD) 

conf rms

nom n at on;

places u n t 

on alert status

of ess than 

2 4 hour s

CIDCON 4

Unit has 12 h rs.

fr om initia

notification to f u y 

attain CIDCON-4 status

Unit increases

mon t or ng and

analys s

ASD ( HD) dentifies

r econ nee ds f or

Jo nt C vil

Dstu rbanc e Task

Force Comma nder

Un t up dates

movem ent needs

ASD(HD) sets

t entat ve H hour ,

if p ossible

Unit f ully attains

CIDCON-4 status;

read y to depart n 

1 2 hour s

CIDCON 3

Unit ncreas es

prepar edn ess,

nclud ng poss bly

pr e-pos tio n ng

a ir lif t and groun d

force s

Un t rea dy to

com plete loa ding

n 5 hou rs an d

to depa rt n 

6 hour s

CIDCON 2

Un t m oves to

airfield or star t

po nt an d boa rds

aircr aft of

vehic es

Unit co mpletes

loa ding; ready to

deploy f rst

aircr aft or

veh cles in

1 hour

CIDCON 1

Un t a tta ns st ate of ma ximum

pr epar edness

F rst a rcr aft fts

off or f rst veh c e

cr osses star t

point

Unit dep oys

CIDCON 1 atta ned as

H Hour occurs

Civil Disturbance Conditions, or CIDCONs, are required levels of preparedness that must be attained by units designated

for civil disturbance operations. CIDCONs are a means of measuring that preparedness. CIDCON 5 is the normal state of

preparedness, which can be sustained indefinitely. CIDCON 1 is the state of preparedness at which the unit deploys.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

deployment, military forces maintain five preparedness postures, called Civil Disturbance 

Conditions (CIDCONS) in order to alert and react to potential civil disturbance operations. 

Changes in the CIDCON level are directed by the JDOMS.63 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i l 

i 

i i 

i

 l 

l 

ll 

i i 

i

 i 

i i 

i 

i 

i -

i

 i 

i i i 

i i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

l 

i 

i 

i i 

i i li 

i i l 

l 

i -

PRESCRIBED LEVELS OF PREPAREDNESS FOR A CIVIL DISTURBANCE CONTROL MISSION 

CIDCON 5 

Unit in n ormal 

training and 

prep ared ness 

statu s 

MACOM 

comman der 

wit h SCRAG 

deter mines 

or ganizatio n an d 

f orces requir ed for civil 

distur bance 

m ission 

FORSCOM 

(CONUS) 

or ap propr iate 

comman der 

OCONUS 

n ominate units 

and Joint Civil 

Distu rbance 

T ask F orce 

Comm ander 

ASD (HD)

confirms 

nomin ation; 

places u nit 

on alert status 

of less than 

2 4 hour s 

CIDCON 4 

Unit has 12 h rs. 

fr om initial 

notification to f ully 

attain CIDCON-4 status 

Unit increases 

monit oring and 

analysis 

ASD ( HD) identifies 

r econ nee ds f or 

Joint Civil 

Distu rbanc e T ask 

Force Comma nder 

Unit up dates 

movem ent needs 

ASD(HD) sets

t entative H-hour , 

if p ossible 

Unit f ully attains 

CIDCON-4 status;

read y to depart in 

1 2 hour s 

CIDCON 3 

Unit increas es 

prepar edn ess,

including possibly 

pr e-positio ning 

a ir lif t and groun d 

force s 

Unit rea dy to 

com plete loa ding 

in 5 hou rs an d 

to depa rt in 

6 hour s 

CIDCON 2 

Unit m oves to 

airfield or star t 

point an d boa rds 

aircr aft of 

vehicles 

Unit co mpletes

loa ding; ready to 

deploy f irst 

aircr aft or 

vehicles in 

1 hour 

CIDCON 1 

Unit a ttains st ate of ma xim um 

pr epar edness 

F irst aircr aft lifts 

off or first vehicle 

cr osses star t 

point 

Unit deploys 

CIDCON 1 attained as 

H- Hour occurs 

Civil Disturbance Conditions, or CIDCONs, are required levels of preparedness that must be attained by units designated 

for civil disturbance operations. CIDCONs are a means of measuri ng that preparedne ss. CIDCON 5 is the normal state of 

preparedness, which can be sustained indefinitely. CIDCON 1 is the state of preparedness at which the unit deploys. 

Figure 4-2. CIDCON Levels of Preparedness. 

CIDCON 5 is a state of normal preparedness that is sustainable indefinitely. Forces may be 

designated for a civil disturbance operation. 

CIDCON 4 is declared once a civil disturbance has developed. The Joint Civil Disturbance Task 

Force commander may establish reconnaissance and information requirements and may initiate 

detailed planning. Upon attaining CIDCON 4, designated units are prepared to cross the start point 

at home station in twelve hours. 

CIDCON 3 represents an increase in preparedness. Military forces may be pre-positioned. The 

President or ASD(HD&ASA) issues orders to be prepared to deploy within six hours. 

63 A commander cannot unilaterally increase the CIDCON of forces under his operational control above CIDCON 4. A 

commander cannot decrease the CIDCON posture without approval from JDOMS. 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 78 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CIDCON 2 reflects that the deployment of federal forces is probable. All designated units will be 

moved to airfields and will have completed movement planning. CIDCON 2 is fully attained when 

units are prepared to deploy in one hour. 

CIDCON 1 is directed one hour prior to time for deployment (H-hour). CIDCON 1 is attained 

simultaneously with H-hour, when the first units have deployed. 

Once military forces are within the civil disturbance area of operations, they fall under the 

operational control of the Joint Task Force commander. The Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force 

commander receives missions from the SCRAG and is responsible for accomplishing the Task 

Force mission.64 

Throughout the employment of military forces, the Commander will maintain liaison with the 

SCRAG, state law enforcement representatives, and municipal authorities. Normally, this liaison is 

through the Defense Coordinating Officer from ARNORTH. The liaison will be maintained until 

termination of the civil disturbance mission. The Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force Commander 

will accept missions from the SCRAG, and, if reasonably possible, within the framework of his 

orders, comply with requests from civil authorities.65 

The SCRAG designates a single state or federal law enforcement coordinating officer, through 

whom requests are typically passed. Validated requests are transmitted to the Joint Civil 

Disturbance Task Force Commander for staffing. Approved missions are assigned through the 

military chain of command to the appropriate unit for execution. The supported combatant 

commander or SCRAG resolves discrepancies when the Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force 

Commander is unable to fulfill requests from the civil authorities. 

Except in a direct support relationship approved and ordered through the military chain of 

command, units should not accept taskings directly from law enforcement or civilian officials. 

Even though the Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force Commander may direct subordinate elements 

to assist designated civil authorities or officials, military personnel will not be placed under the 

command of civilians. This requirement does not preclude the establishment of joint patrols or 

jointly manned operations.66 

On order, commitment of federal forces will be terminated at a specified date and time. Forces 

redeploy to home station where they return to the control of their respective commands. 

3. The Standing Rules for the Use of Force for U.S. Forces 

Civil disturbance operations are conducted in accordance with Appendix L of the Standing Rules of 

Engagement/Standing Rules for the Use of Force for U.S. Forces (SRUF). Guidance on how and 

64 It is important to remember that civilian authorities retain primary authority over the employment of military forces. 

See supra notes 1-4 and accompanying text; DoDD 3025.12, supra note 7, para. 4.1.5; see also 9 Op. Att’y Gen. 517 

(1860) (“Under [the Insurrection Act] the President may employ the militia and the land and naval forces for the 

purpose of causing the laws to be executed; but when a military force is called into the field for that purpose, its 

operations must be purely defensive, and the military power on such occasion must be kept in strict subordination to the 

civil authority.”). 

65 JP 3-28, supra note 8, Chapter III. 66 Id. 

Chapter 5 

79 Civil Disturbance Operations 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

when forces can use force in a CDO mission are detailed in that annex. Although the CJCSI is 

classified, Annex L is not and can be shared with our mission partners. 

a. Custody and Detention 

All apprehensions should be made by the civil police force unless they are not available or require 

assistance. Military forces have the authority to detain rioters, looters, or other civilians committing 

criminal offenses.67 Civilians taken into custody should be transferred to civilian law enforcement 

authorities as soon as possible. 

All members of the force must remember that state and federal criminal law and procedure govern 

apprehension. Apprehension is justified only on the basis of probable cause to believe that an 

offense has been committed and that the person to be apprehended committed the offense. Soldiers 

should not question detainees beyond basic pedigree such as name and address. If formal 

questioning of an offender is necessary, civilian police should conduct the interview. If civilian 

police are not available, CID agents or military police may conduct interviews only if the interview 

is essential to the civil disturbance mission. Actions taken by Soldiers that do not conform to 

criminal law constitutional standards could jeopardize future prosecution and subject Soldiers and 

their Commanders to criminal and/or civil liability.68 

b. Search and Seizure 

CDO CONPLANs anticipate that military forces will generally not be involved in searches unless 

there is “an immediate danger of violence, destruction of evidence, or escape of violent persons 

unless the search is conducted without delay.” In all other cases, local authorities should conduct 

searches. When required to perform searches, federal armed forces may conduct warrantless 

searches under the same constitutional parameters imposed upon law enforcement officials. Joint 

Civil Disturbance Task Force forces conducting a warrantless search will fully document the 

reasons for the search as soon as is reasonably convenient.69 Generally these searches are limited to 

the following incidents. 

(1) Stop and Frisk 

If there is a reasonable suspicion based upon articulable facts that a person has committed, is 

committing, or is about to commit a crime, that person may be temporarily stopped and questioned 

about his activities. The stop must be limited in duration to that which is reasonably necessary to 

investigate the suspicion. If there is a reasonable suspicion based on articulable facts that a person 

is armed or is carrying instruments of violence and that the individual presents an immediate risk of 

harm, members of the armed force may conduct a “frisk” (an external “patdown” of the clothing) 

for weapons. Any weapons found during a frisk may be removed from the individual and seized.70 

67 JP 3-28, supra note 8, Chapter III. 68 See FM 3-19.15, supra note 47, Chapter 3. 

69 Id. 70 Id. 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 80 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

(2) Search Incident to Lawful Apprehension 

A person lawfully detained may be searched for weapons or destructible evidence. A search for 

weapons or destructible evidence may also be conducted in the area where the detained person 

could reach with a sudden movement to obtain a weapon or destroy evidence.71 

(3) Exigent circumstances 

Military forces assisting law enforcement may make a search without a warrant when they have 

reason to believe (probable cause) that weapons, objects related to criminal activity, or persons 

believed to have committed an offense, are in the place to be searched; and they have reason to 

believe that the delay necessary to obtain a search warrant would result in removal of the weapons 

or destruction of the objects related to criminal activity. For example, Joint Civil Disturbance Task 

Force forces may stop and search an automobile without a warrant when there is reason to believe 

that the automobile contains weapons or instruments of violence and/or contains an individual 

reasonably believed to have committed violence.72 

(4) Emergency 

Military forces in a civil disturbance operation may make an immediate entry into a building when 

there is reason to believe that entry is necessary to prevent injury to persons, serious damage to 

property, loss of evidence, to protect public safety, or to render aid to someone who is in danger.73 

(5) Hot pursuit 

Military forces pursuing a person who they have reason to believe has just committed a serious 

crime, may enter a vehicle or building believed to be entered by the suspect and search the building 

or vehicle for the person or any weapons that might be used to further his escape.74 

(6) Plain View 

During the course of otherwise lawful activity, military forces may seize any unlawful weapons or 

objects related to criminal activity which they observe in plain view.75 When conducting 

warrantless searches that require a probable cause determination, military forces can obtain advice 

from a judge advocate; however, the probable cause determination must be made personally by the 

individual desiring to conduct the search. 

If a search warrant is required, local civil authorities should obtain judicially issued search warrants. 

If local civilian authorities are not available, judge advocates need to be prepared to provide advice 

on probable cause to military authorities before they approach a local judge or magistrate for a 

search warrant. 

71 Id. 72 Id. 73 Id. 

74 Id. 75 Id. 

Chapter 5 

81 Civil Disturbance Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

When feasible, all searches conducted by military personnel will be conducted by two personnel 

with the actual search performed by someone of the same sex.76 A hand receipt or some similar 

document should be prepared when items of personal property are seized from an individual.77 

c. Confinement Facilities 

The Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force should not operate a detention facility.78 Any person 

apprehended should be turned over to the police for detention. Military correctional facilities 

cannot be used to detain civilians. If available civilian detention facilities cannot accommodate the 

number of detained persons who are awaiting arraignment,79 the Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force 

commander must seek the approval of the SCRAG and Combatant Commander to set up a 

temporary detention facility.80 

Should the Task Force be required to operate a detention facility, the detention facility standards 

and operations should conform, to the maximum extent possible, to current DoD confinement 

facility operations and will be under the professional supervision and control of Military Police 

personnel.81 The establishment and operation of military detention facilities is a temporary 

expedient and is authorized only until such time as the custody of detained persons can be 

transferred to civil authorities.82 

d. Riot Control Agents 

Normally, for CDO the deployment and use of riot control agents is allowed as a matter of U.S. 

policy.83 However, initial approval authority for its deployment and use may be retained at a level 

higher than the Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force Commander and may require a specific 

request.84 

76 Id. para. 3-20 to 3-37 requires the application of common sense when evaluating options to search a person of the 

opposite gender and recommends that searches of the person be performed by a member of the same sex. 

77 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, FIELD MANUAL 3-19.1, MILITARY POLICE OPERATIONS, ch. 9 (22 Mar. 2001) [hereinafter FM 

3-19.1] and U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, FIELD MANUAL 3-19.13, LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS (10 JAN. 2005) 

[hereinafter FM 3-19.13] contain extensive information on conducting searches and processing suspects and witnesses. 78 FM 3-19.15, supra note 47, paras. 3-38–3-40; see generally, DODD 3025.12, supra note 7, para. 4.2.7 (“DoD 

Components shall not take charge of any function of civil government unless absolutely necessary under conditions of 

extreme emergency.”). 

79 The Task Force Commander is responsible for verifying the fact that available federal, state, and local confinement 

facilities can no longer accommodate the number of persons apprehended. USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502, supra 

note 62. CONPLAN 3502 (or Commander U.S. PACIFIC COMMAND CONPLAN 7502) specifies that detention 

facilities be under the control of U.S. Army MP Corps personnel. Due to base closure and increased joint nature of 

operations it is possible that U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force confinement facilities could be used. 80 USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502, supra note 62; JP 3-28, supra note 8; FM 3-19.15, supra note 47. 81 See, e.g., U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 190-47, THE ARMY CORRECTIONS SYSTEM (6 June 2006); see also FM 3-19.1, 

supra note 77. 82 USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502, supra note 62.
 83 USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502, supra note 62; Exec. Order No. 11,850, 40 C.F.R. 16,187 (Apr. 8, 1975); 

CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTR. 3110.07A, NUCLEAR, BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL DEFENSE; RIOT CONTROL 

AGENTS; AND HERBICIDES (15 Dec. 1998) (classified Secret); FM 3-19.15, supra note 47.
 84 See USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502, supra note 62, Appendix 4 to Annex E (Legal). 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 82 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

4. Other Legal Considerations 

a. Billeting of Troops 

Selection of a location to assemble and billet troops can have significant legal implications. When 

possible, assembly and quartering areas should be on military installations or federal property. If 

these locations are not practical, state and other local government property should be sought for use. 

Locating assembly areas on public property can reduce property damage claims, contract costs, and 

adverse perceptions about the military operation. 

b. Intelligence 

See Chapter 9, Intelligence Law and Policy Considerations During Domestic Support Operations. 

c. Claims 

Negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of military forces assisting law enforcement during civil 

disturbances may be covered under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).85 In order for claims 

under the FTCA to be compensable, damage or injury must be caused by acts or omissions of 

employees of the United States. National Guard troops in Title 10 or Title 32 status, as well as 

active duty military members, are considered U.S. employees for the purposes of the FTCA. 

National Guard forces activated pursuant to a state activation statute are not considered employees 

of the United States, and potential claims arising out of the activities of these forces should be 

directed to state authorities.86 

The development of disaster and civil disturbance claims plans is the responsibility of the head of 

the various Area Claims Offices (ACOs) across the United States.87 The ACO in whose 

geographical area a claims incident occurs is primarily responsible for investigating and processing 

the claim.88 With the approval of Commander, United States Army Claims Service, the responsible 

ACO can appoint a special Claims Processing Office to handle claims arising from civil disturbance 

operations.89 

Even though primary claims investigating responsibilities fall to the ACO, judge advocates 

deployed as part of a civil disturbance task force can assist in the investigation by insuring that 

potential claims are documented and available information concerning the claims collected. Judge 

advocates assisting the Joint Task Force can also assist by collecting information concerning the 

status of National Guard troops operating within the area.90 

85 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346, 2671–2680. 86 USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502, supra note 62. 

87 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 27-20, CLAIMS, para. 1-11k (8 Feb. 2008). 88 Id. para. 2-2. 

89 Id. para. 1-17(c). 

90 Detailed information on claims arising during disasters can be accessed at http://www.jagcnet.army.mil/Claims, then 

click the hyperlink for “Disaster Claims SOP.” 

Chapter 5 

83 Civil Disturbance Operations 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

d. Medical Support 

Typically, medical personnel wear the distinctive medical arm brassard when performing medical 

duties. The primary mission of medical support personnel deployed with a Joint Civil Disturbance 

Task Force is to treat military personnel requiring medical care. Civilian personnel should be seen 

by the civilian health care system. Military treatment facilities may be used to treat civilians only in 

cases of emergency when undue suffering or the loss of life or limb is a possibility. Civilians 

admitted to military treatment facilities should be transferred to a civilian hospital as soon as 

medically feasible. 

Military personnel should be admitted to civilian hospitals only in an emergency and should be 

transferred to a military facility as soon as medically possible. In some locations military and 

civilian hospitals have patient sharing agreements which would allow civilians to use the military 

facility. 

e. Civil Law, Ordinances, Restrictions, and Interference with Federal Forces 

Federal law makes it a crime to interfere with law enforcement officers engaged in controlling civil 

disorders.91 Included in the definition of “law enforcement officers” are members of the National 

Guard, in both state and federal status, and members of the armed forces.92 

Close coordination with local governmental authorities can assist the Joint Civil Disturbance Task 

Force Commander in accomplishing the mission. Except in the unlikely event of martial law, 

federal forces are unable to impose restrictions on the civil population. However, local 

governments may be able to implement such restrictions to aid in the control of lawlessness. The 

Joint Civil Disturbance Task Force Commander may make recommendations to local governments 

concerning the appropriateness of various restrictions and then assist local authorities in carrying 

them out.93 

f. Loan and Lease of Military Equipment 

Approval authorities for the loan and lease of DoD materiel to federal, state, and local law 

enforcement authorities and the National Guard historically has been determined based upon the 

type of equipment to be provided. Requests for the loan or lease of personnel, arms, ammunition, 

tactical vehicles, vessels and aircraft, riot control agents, and concertina wire for expected civil 

disturbances will be forwarded through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JDOMS) to the 

91 18 U.S.C. §§ 231–233. 

92 Id. § 232 which states: 

The term “law enforcement officer” means any officer or employee of the United States, any State, 

any political subdivision of a State, or the District of Columbia, while engaged in the enforcement or 

prosecution of any of the criminal laws of the United States, a State, any political subdivision of a 

State, or the District of Columbia; and such term shall specifically include members of the National 

Guard (as defined in section 101 of title 10), members of the organized militia of any State, or 

territory of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or the District of Columbia not 

included within the National Guard (as defined in section 101 of title 10), and members of the Armed 

Forces of the United States, while engaged in suppressing acts of violence or restoring law and order 

during a civil disorder. 

93 FM 3-19.15, supra note 47. 

Chapter 5 

Civil Disturbance Operations 84 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Secretary of Defense (SECDEF). The loan or lease of fire-fighting resources, protective equipment, 

body armor, clothing, searchlights and use of DoD facilities can be approved by garrison, 

installation, or task force commanders.94 All loans or leases of U.S. Army materiel will be for a 

period of fifteen days with the possibility of an additional fifteen day extension.95 Commanders are 

authorized to approve the loan or lease of equipment as required to save human life, prevent human 

suffering, or reduce large-scale property damage or destruction. 

There is no specific statutory authority to loan or lease equipment for use in civil disturbance 

situations. Loans to federal agencies are completed pursuant to the Economy Act and require a loan 

agreement but no surety bond.96 Equipment for non-federal law enforcement agencies must be 

leased under the leasing statute, which requires both a lease agreement and a surety bond.97 The 

leasing statute also includes the requirement for the payment of a lease fee, which may be waived 

by the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installation, Logistics and Environment) (ASA(I, L&E)). 

When commanders approve emergency loans or leases, follow-up action will be taken within five 

days to formalize the action by completing a loan or lease agreement.98 (See DOPLAW Handbook, 

Supp., App. 5-7, Loan, Lease and Donation of Army Material.) 

94 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 700-131, LOAN AND LEASE OF ARMY MATERIEL, para. 2-6b (1 Sept. 1996) [hereinafter
 

AR 700-131]. DoDD 3025.12, supra note 7, identifies MACDIS operations as unprogrammed emergency
 

requirements. Procedures for financing and reporting costs associated with civil disturbance operations are prescribed
 

in DoD Instruction 7200.9. See also NGR 500-1, supra note 17, Chap. 3-1, which governs the loan or lease of National
 

Guard property.
 95 AR 700-131, supra note 94, at Table 2-1.
 96 31 U.S.C. § 1535. 

97 10 U.S.C. § 2667; see also AR 700-131, supra note 94, paras. 2-7, 2-8 (discussing loan/lease agreements and surety 

bonds). 

98 AR 700-131, supra note 94, para. 2-7a.
 

Chapter 5 

85 Civil Disturbance Operations 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Chapter 5
 

Civil Disturbance Operations 86 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 6 

COUNTERDRUG OPERATIONS 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 124 - Detection and Monitoring of Aerial and Maritime Transit of Illegal Drugs. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 371-381 - Military Support for Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 379 - Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachments. 

•	 14 U.S.C. § 89 – Coast Guard Law Enforcement Authority 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 1385 - The Posse Comitatus Act (PCA). 

•	 32 U.S.C. § 112 - National Guard Funding. 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 1004 (1991) (as amended). 

•	 DoD Financial Management Regulation, Vol. 2B, ch. 14, Drug Interdiction and Counter Drug 

Activities, June 2004. 

•	 DepSecDef Memo, Department of Defense Counternarcotics Policy, July 31, 2002. 

•	 DepSecDef Memo, Department of Defense International Counternarcotics Policy, December 24, 

2008. 

•	 DepSecDef Memo, Department Support to Domestic Law Enforcement Agencies Performing 

Counternarcotics Activities, October 2, 2003. 

•	 DASD/CN Memo, Policy Definition of “Counterdrug Activities”, October 23, 2002. 

•	 DASD/CN Memo, Policy Definition of “Narcoterrorism”, April 12, 2004. 

•	 DASD/CN Memo, Counter Drug Support to Counter-Narcoterrorist Activities (Memo to Chief, 

NGB) August, 26, 2005. 

•	 DASD/CN Memo, Procedures for Handling Requests for Counterdrug Narcoterrorist Support, 

2006. 

•	 DoDD 5525.5, DoD Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, January 15, 1986. 

•	 CNGB Memo, Counter Drug Support to Counter-Narcoterrorist Activities, December 22, 2005. 

•	 CNGB Memo, Implementation of Procedures for Handling Requests for Counterdrug 

Narcoterrorist Support, June 2, 2006. 

•	 NGR 500-2 - National Guard Counterdrug Support, August 28, 2008. 

•	 CJCSI 3121.01B - Standing Rules of Engagement/Standing Rules for the Use of Force for U.S. 

Forces, June 13, 2005. 

•	 CJCSI 3710.01B, DoD Counterdrug Support, January 26, 2007. 

•	 Joint Pub 3-07.4, Joint Counterdrug Operations, June 13, 2007. 

•	 The President’s National Drug Control Strategy (2010). 

A. Introduction 

In the 1980s, Congress determined that DoD should provide increased support to civilian law 

enforcement agencies’ (LEA) counterdrug operations. Over the years, Congress increasingly 

mandated support by DoD for counterdrug operations. This mandate now includes both active 

components and National Guard forces engaged full-time in the mission. DoD counterdrug 

operations are coordinated by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Counter Narcotics 

(DASD/CN), which is located within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special 

Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD(SO/LIC)). The National Guard CD program is 

Chapter 6 

87 Counterdrug Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

administered through NGB-CD. This chapter examines support by both the active duty military and 

the National Guard. 

B. Title 10 Support to Counterdrug Operations 

In 1981, Congress passed Chapter 18 of Title 10 entitled Military Cooperation with Civilian Law 

Enforcement Officials.

1

 Although Chapter 18 permits general military cooperation with civilian 

law enforcement agencies, Congress passed the Act and its subsequent amendments with the intent 

of enabling DoD to provide increased counterdrug support.2 

In 1989, Congress took additional steps, assigning specific counterdrug missions to DoD. As part 

of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Years (FY) 1990 and 1991,3 

Congress designated DoD as the single “lead” agency for the “detection and monitoring” of aerial 

and maritime transit of illegal drugs into the United States.4

 Section 1206 of the same Act stated 

that the “Secretary of Defense shall direct that the armed forces, to the maximum extent practicable, 

conduct military training exercises in drug interdiction areas.”5 

Finally, in FY 1991,Congress provided specific counterdrug authority to DoD by passing Section 

1004 of the NDAA.6 

In addition to providing statutory authority for counterdrug support, Congress annually appropriates 

funds to DoD specifically for these operations.7

 The money is disbursed through DASD/CN and it 

differs from the funding for most other military support to civilian law enforcement in that 

reimbursement is not required. 

1. National Defense Authorization Act of 1991 

Congress annually gives DoD authority to support federal, state, local, and foreign agencies that 

have counterdrug responsibilities. This authority has not been codified, but can be found in Section 

1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 1991.8

 Section 1004 is the primary 

authority for DoD support to counterdrug operations. 

1

 10 U.S.C.A. §§ 371–382 (2006). See infra Chapter 2, Military Support to Civilian Law Enforcement. 2 See H.R. Rep. No. 97-71, 1981 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1785. The 1986 amendments to Chapter 18 were contained in the 

“Defense Drug Interdiction Assistance Act.” Pub. L. 99-570, § 3051, 100 Stat. 3207-74. 

3

 National Defense Authorization Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-189, 103 Stat. 1563 [hereinafter FY90 NDAA]. 

4 10 U.S.C. § 124 (2006). 

5

 FY90 NDAA, supra note 3, § 1206. 

6

 National Defense Authorization Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 1004, as amended, 104 Stat. 1629 [hereinafter
 

FY91 NDAA]. See also generally DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 6. Statutes Governing DoD Support to 

Counterdrug Operations. 7

 The Counternarcotics Program is financed through the Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug Activities, defense 

appropriation, which is a central transfer account (CTA). It is a single line that accounts for all associated counter 

narcotics (CN) resources with the exception of those resources for the Active components’ military personnel, and 

Service OPTEMPO. In 2009, Congress appropriated $1.06 billion for counterdrug operations. National Defense 

Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub. L. No. 110-417 (2008). 

8 Id. Since 1991, these authorities have been continuously amended. Many of these authorities are also reproduced in 

the notes following 10 U.S.C.A. § 374 in the annotated codes. 

Chapter 6 

Counterdrug Operations 88 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Under Section 1004, the Secretary of Defense may provide support for the counterdrug activities of 

any federal, state, local or foreign law enforcement agencies if the support is requested by: 

•	 The official with counterdrug responsibilities for the requesting federal department or agency; 

•	 The appropriate state or local official for state or local support; or 

•	 The appropriate official of a federal department or agency with counterdrug responsibilities for 

foreign support.9 

The following types of support may be provided by the Secretary of Defense under § 1004. 

•	 The maintenance and repair of equipment made available by DoD for the purpose of: 

•	 preserving the future utility of the equipment for DoD; and 

•	 upgrading such equipment to ensure the compatibility of such equipment with other 

equipment used by DoD. 

•	 The maintenance, repair, or upgrading of equipment, other than equipment referred to in 

subsection (a), for the purpose of: 

•	 ensuring that the equipment being maintained or repaired is compatible with equipment used 

by DoD; and 

•	 upgrading such equipment to ensure compatibility of that equipment with equipment used 

by DoD. 

•	 The transportation of personnel of the United States and foreign countries (including per diem 

costs associated with such transportation), and the transportation of supplies and equipment, for 

the purpose of facilitating counterdrug activities within or outside the United States. 

•	 The establishment and operation of bases of operations and training facilities for the purpose of 

facilitating counterdrug activities of DoD or any federal, state, local law enforcement agency 

within or outside the United States, or counterdrug activities of a foreign law enforcement 

agency outside the United States.10 

•	 Counterdrug related training of law enforcement personnel of federal, state, or local 

governments, or of foreign countries, including associated support expenses for trainees and the 

provision of materials necessary to carry out such training. 

•	 The detection, monitoring, and communication of the movement of: 

•	 air and sea traffic within 25 miles of, and outside the geographic boundaries of the United 

States; and 

9

 FY91 NDAA, supra note 6, § 1004(a). 

10 Section 1004(h) requires notification by the Secretary of Defense to the congressional defense committees when 

military construction under this subsection is to be carried out. The project may not commence until twenty-one days 

after the date written notice was received by Congress. This requirement only applies to construction projects that will 

modify or repair DoD facilities for the purpose set forth in this subsection, and whose estimated cost is more than 

$500,000. See id. § 1004(h). 

Chapter 6 

89 Counterdrug Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

•	 surface traffic outside the geographic boundary of the United States and within the United 

States not to exceed 25 miles of the boundary if the initial detection occurred outside of the 

boundary. 

•	 Construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors 

across international boundaries of the United States. 

•	 Establishment of command, control, communication, and computer networks for improved 

integration of law enforcement, active military, and National Guard activities. 

•	 The provision of linguist and intelligence analyst services. 

•	 Aerial and ground reconnaissance.11 

The Secretary of Defense may contract for equipment and services to provide the above types of 

support if DoD would normally acquire such equipment and services via contract to support similar 

DoD activities.12 

Section 1004 also provides statutory exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act. Section 1004 

counterdrug support is not subject to the requirements of 10 U.S.C., Chapter 18, with the exception 

of 10 U.S.C. §§ 375 and 376.13 Further, the Secretary of Defense may provide support that will 

adversely affect military preparedness in the short term in contravention of 10 U.S.C. § 376 if the 

Secretary determines that the importance of providing such support outweighs the short-term 

adverse impact.14 For example, § 1004(f) allows the Secretary of Defense to plan and execute 

otherwise valid military training and operations for the primary purpose of aiding civilian law 

enforcement agencies, which contradicts the guidance contained in Enclosure 2 of DoDD 5525.5. 

2. Detection and Monitoring 

10 U.S.C. § 124 makes DoD the lead federal agency for the detection and monitoring of aerial and 

maritime transit of illegal drugs into the United States. This statute does not extend to the detection 

and monitoring of land transit. Although detection and monitoring is now a DoD mission per § 

124, it must still be carried out in support of federal, state, local, or foreign law enforcement 

authorities.15 

In order to perform the detection and monitoring mission, DoD personnel may operate DoD 

equipment to intercept a vessel or an aircraft detected outside the land area of the United States for 

the purposes of: 

•	 Identifying and communicating with that vessel or aircraft; and 

11 Id. § 1004(b). CHAIRMAN JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, INSTR. 3710.01B, DOD COUNTERDRUG SUPPORT (26 January 

2007) [hereinafter CJCSI 3710.01B], provides a detailed listing and discussion of approval authorities for certain types 

of DoD support to counterdrug operations. 

12 FY91 NDAA, supra note 6, para. (d). 13 Id. § 1004(g). 

14 Id. § 1004(e). 15 10 U.S.C. § 124(a)(2). 

Chapter 6 

Counterdrug Operations 90 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

• Directing that vessel or aircraft to go to a location designated by appropriate civilian officials.16 

In cases where a vessel or aircraft is detected outside the land area of the United States, DoD 

personnel may begin, or continue, pursuit of that vessel or aircraft over the land area of the United 

States.17 Notably, the DoD detection and monitoring mission does not authorize DoD personnel to 

conduct searches or make seizures or arrests—which are prohibited under 10 U.S.C. § 375. 

3. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Implementation (CJCSI) 

Authority to approve counterdrug operational support to LEAs under the statutes discussed above 

has been delegated by the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF), through the Chairman of the Joint 

Chiefs of Staff, to the Commanders of the Unified Combatant Commands (with the authority to 

further delegate to flag and general officers within their chains of command).18 

CJCSI 3710.01B provides a specific list of the types of counterdrug missions that may be approved, 

such as certain types of aerial reconnaissance, transportation support, intelligence analyst support, 

engineering support, and more. Authority to approve counterdrug support missions involving 

ground reconnaissance, detection and monitoring operations, and deployments for longer than 179 

days or involving more than 400 personnel is specifically withheld from this delegation. These 

missions require specific SECDEF approval. CJCSI 3710.01B, contains significant guidance and 

guidelines on permissible counterdrug support to LEAs and should be consulted whenever 

reviewing a proposed operation.19 

On 31 July 2002, the Deputy Secretary of Defense published the DoD Counternarcotics Policy. 

This policy states that DoD will focus its counternarcotics activities on programs that: enhance the 

readiness of the DoD; satisfy DoD’s statutory detection and monitoring responsibilities; contribute 

to the war on terrorism; advance DoD’s security cooperation goals; or enhance national security. 

A year later on 2 October 2003, the Deputy Secretary of Defense published the policy on domestic 

counternarcotics activities. This policy established a goal of reducing the operational stress on Title 

10 forces that conduct domestic counternarcotics activities through utilization of Title 32 National 

Guard forces; concentrating DoD’s support on those unique military skills and capabilities that 

domestic law enforcement agencies lack, or cannot practically replicate and employ those measures 

designed to detect, interdict, disrupt, or curtail any activity that is reasonably related to narcotics 

trafficking. This policy directed that Under Secretary of Defense for Policy shall be responsible for 

reviewing and approving Title 10 counternarcotics support, except where that authority was 

delegated pursuant to CJCSI 3710.01B. 

This policy also dictates that all requests for department support must satisfy the following criteria: 

16 Id. § 124(b). 17 The term “United States,” as used in 10 U.S.C. § 124, means the land area of the several states and any territory, 

commonwealth, or possession of the United States. 10 U.S.C. § 124(c) (2006). 

18 CJCSI 3710.01B, encl. A, paras. 1 & 8.g. U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) further delegated its
 

authority to the Joint Force Land Component Commander (JFLCC), who further delegated his authority to Commander, 

Joint Task Force-North (JTF-N).
 19 A copy of CJCSI 3710.01B is located at DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 6-6.
 

Chapter 6 

91 Counterdrug Operations 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

•	 there must be a valid counterdrug activities nexus; 

•	 there must be a proper request;20 

•	 the support must improve unit readiness or mission capability; 

•	 the support must provide a training opportunity that contributes to combat readiness; and 

•	 Title 10 forces will not be used for continuing, on-going, long-term operational support 

commitments at the same location. 

For all domestic counternarcotics support, requests are sent to USNORTHCOM. Commander, 

USNORTHCOM, will first ensure a National Guard unit cannot provide the support. If not, 

USNORTHCOM will determine whether the requested support is feasible, supportable, and 

consistent with DoD policy. If approval is authorized under CJCSI 3710.01B, Commander, 

USNORTHCOM, or his or her delegated authority, may approve the request. All other requests 

will be forwarded through the Joint Staff deployment order process, to the DASD/CN and Under 

Secretary of Defense for Policy for consideration. 

Requests sent directly to DoD will first be referred to the National Guard Bureau. If the NGB 

determines that Title 32 National Guard forces cannot provide the support, the request will be 

referred through the Joint Staff to Commander, USNORTHCOM, for review. If feasible and 

supportable, the Commander, USNORTHCOM, will request Title 10 forces through the Joint Staff 

from the appropriate service. 

Detailed rules governing the use of force by military forces engaged in counterdrug support 

operations within the United States are provided in CJCSI 3121.01B, Standing Rules of 

Engagement/Standing Rules for the Use of Force for U.S. Forces, Appendices L and O. 

4. Counterdrug Support Task Forces 

Counterdrug support operations are planned, coordinated, and controlled primarily via three 

headquarters: Joint Interagency Task Force (JIATF) South, located in Key West, Florida, (under 

the command and control of Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM)), JIATF West, located in 

Hawaii, (under the command and control of Pacific Command (USPACOM)), and Joint Task Force 

North (JTF-N), located in El Paso, Texas (under the command and control of USNORTHCOM.) 

While the two JIATFs do provide some support to LEAs in their Areas of Responsibility (AORs),21 

their primary focus is on operations in the source and transit zones of South and Central America 

and in Southeast and Southwest Asia and in international waters and airspace. This focus on 

20 A proper request must be from an appropriate official of a federal, state, or local government agency who has 

responsibility for counternarcotics activities. First, federal law must authorize DoD to provide the requested support. 

Second, the support will assist the requesting agency in accomplishing its counternarcotics activities within the United 

States. Third, the support is consistent with DoD’s implementation of the national Drug Control Strategy. Finally, the 

support is limited to those activities that are militarily unique and significantly benefit the DoD or essential to national 

security goals. Memorandum, Deputy Secretary of Defense, Subject: Department Support to Domestic Law 

Enforcement Agencies Performing Counternarcotics Activities (2 Oct 2003). 

21 For example, Hawaii falls within PACOM’s AOR, and Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands fall within 

NORTHCOM’s AOR. 

Chapter 6 

Counterdrug Operations 92 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

interdiction in the source and transit zones is consistent with priorities outlined in the President’s 

National Drug Control Strategy – 2010.22 

To deconflict and identify interim and long-term solutions for command and control arrangements 

between USNORTHCOM, USSOUTHCOM and USPACOM, the ASD (SO/LIC) established 

specific areas of responsibility for JIATF-S, JIATF-W and JTF-N.23 While the JIATFs focus their 

attention on international AORs, the bulk of domestic counterdrug support is provided by JTF-N. 

Joint Task Force Six, activated on November 13, 1989,24 was designated the lead DoD organization 

responsible for planning and coordinating all DoD support to civilian drug law enforcement 

agencies in the continental United States (CONUS). Joint Task Force Six’s original AOR, 

composed of the four southwest border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California, was 

expanded in 1995 to cover all of CONUS.25 On 28 September 2004, Joint Task Force Six was 

officially renamed Joint Task Force North. JTF-N’s mission includes synchronizing and integrating 

DoD operational, technological, training, and intelligence support to domestic law enforcement 

agency counterdrug efforts in CONUS to reduce the availability of illegal drugs. 

Located at Fort Bliss, Texas, there are approximately 175 personnel assigned to JTF-N, including 

civilians, contractors, and service members from all five services. Unlike the JIATFs, JTF-N has no 

LEA representatives assigned to or working in the command. Joint Task Force North has no 

assigned units and no tasking authority. The command relies entirely on volunteer units to perform 

its operational support missions. From its inception as JTF-6, JTF-N has completed over 6,000 

counterdrug support missions throughout CONUS. These included aerial and ground 

reconnaissance missions, detection and monitoring, mobile training teams, and engineer support 

missions. 

Co-located with JTF-N is Operation Alliance, a headquarters comprised of representatives from 

federal law enforcement agencies. Operation Alliance serves as the single point of contact for all 

law enforcement agencies (federal, state, and local) in requesting DoD counterdrug support. 

Operation Alliance verifies the counterdrug nexus, prioritizes LEA support requests, and then 

forwards their requests to JTF-N for review and consideration. 

JIATF-S and JIATF-W are both under the direction of Coast Guard Rear Admirals with senior 

representatives from components of DoD, DHS, and DOJ in other senior leadership positions. 

JIATF-S conducts detection & monitoring operations in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific source 

and transit zones.26 JIATF-W combats drug-related transnational organized crime to reduce threats 

22 The National Drug Control Strategy is available at 

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/policy/ndcs10/index.html.
 23 Memorandum, Assistant Secretary of Defense, Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict, Subject Joint Interagency 

task Force (JIATF) Area Responsibilities (1 Aug 2003). 

24 Message, 152330Z Oct 89, Commander in Chief, Forces Command (CINCFOR), subject: Operations Order– 

Counternarcotics Operations (15 Oct 1989). 

25 Message, 212255Z Aug 95, Commander in Chief, Forces Command (CINCFOR), subject: Commander Joint Task
 

Force Six Expansion of Area of Responsibility for Counterdrug Support for Domestic Drug Law Enforcement Agencies 

(21 Aug 1995). The AOR was expanded to include CONUS, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
 26 When JIATF-S locates suspect vessels it transfers TACON of surface assets to the U.S. Coast Guard Seventh District 

(Caribbean operations) or Eleventh District (Eastern Pacific operations), at which point the U.S. Coast Guard conducts 

interdiction operations. In cases in which evidence of maritime drug trafficking or other illegal activity is discovered, 

Chapter 6 

93 Counterdrug Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

in the Asia-Pacific region in order to protect U.S. national security interests and promote regional 

stability. 

5. Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachments 

As the primary enforcer of U.S. maritime law, the U.S. Coast Guard plays a critical role in the war 

on drugs. The Coast Guard has the lead role in maritime drug interdiction and shares the lead role 

in air interdiction with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The Coast Guard conducts 

extensive maritime counterdrug operations. These operations range from enforcing drug possession 

and use laws during routine recreational and other vessel boardings in all areas in which the Coast 

Guard operates, to conducting sustained multi-unit operations targeting major drug traffickers far 

from U.S. shores. Since the PCA does not apply to the Coast Guard,27 the PCA restrictions on 

arrest, search, seizure, and the interdiction of vessels and aircraft, are inapplicable to Coast Guard 

operations and personnel. Moreover, the Coast Guard has broad organic law enforcement authority 

under 14 U.S.C. § 89 to enforce U.S. laws in waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction and over vessels 

subject to U.S. jurisdiction wherever they may be located.28 

To capitalize on the Coast Guard’s expertise and uniquely broad maritime law enforcement 

authority, 10 U.S.C. § 379 requires the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland 

Security to assign Coast Guard law enforcement detachments (LEDETs) to every appropriate naval 

surface vessel operating at sea in a drug interdiction area.29 See DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 

6-12, JP 3-07.4, Appendix E, LEDETS. 

Coast Guard personnel assigned to LEDETs are trained in law enforcement and have the powers of 

arrest, search, and seizure in accordance with 14 U.S.C. § 89. Coast Guard personnel assigned to 

U.S. Navy vessels under § 379 will perform functions which are agreed to by the Secretary of 

JIATF-S and the Coast Guard coordinate case disposition with DOJ and with foreign partners as appropriate. JIATF-S 

works closely with ongoing DOJ Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force investigations such as Operation 

Panama Express to synthesize and evaluate available information about suspected maritime and aerial drug movement 

to detect, monitor and facilitate the interdiction of suspect vessels and aircraft. 

27 United States v. Chaparro-Almeida, 679 F.2d 423 (5th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1156 (1982). 28 14 U.S.C. § 89(a) states: 

The Coast Guard may make inquiries, examinations, inspections, searches, seizures, and arrests upon 

the high seas and waters over which the United States has jurisdiction, for the prevention, detection, 

and suppression of violations of laws of the United States. For such purposes, commissioned, 

warrant, and petty officers may at any time go on board of any vessel subject to the jurisdiction, or to 

the operation of any law, of the United States, address inquiries to those on board, examine the ship’s 

documents and papers, and examine, inspect, and search the vessel and use all necessary force to 

compel compliance. When from such inquiries, examination, inspection, or search it appears that a 

breach of the laws of the United States rendering a person liable to arrest is being, or has been 

committed, by any person, such person shall be arrested or, if escaping to shore, shall be immediately 

pursued and arrested on shore, or other lawful and appropriate action shall be taken; or, if it shall 

appear that a breach of the laws of the United States has been committed so as to render such vessel, 

or the merchandise, or any part thereof, on board of, or brought into the United States by, such vessel, 

liable to forfeiture, or so as to render such vessel liable to a fine or penalty and if necessary to secure 

such fine or penalty, such vessel or such merchandise, or both, shall be seized. 

29 10 U.S.C. § 379(a). A “drug interdiction area” is defined as an area outside the land area of the United States in 

which the Secretary of Defense, after consulting with the Attorney General, determines that activities involving 

smuggling of drugs into the United States are ongoing. 

Chapter 6 

Counterdrug Operations 94 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Defense and Secretary of Homeland Security and which are otherwise within the Coast Guard’s 

jurisdiction.30 No fewer than 500 active duty Coast Guard personnel will be assigned duties 

under10 U.S.C. § 379, unless the Secretary of Homeland Security, after consulting with the 

Secretary of Defense, determines that there are not enough naval surface vessels to support this 

number of personnel. If this is the case, these Coast Guard personnel may be assigned duties to 

enforce the laws listed under 10 U.S.C. § 374(b)(4)(A).31 

Specific rules governing the use of Coast Guard LEDETs are provided in Commandant, United 

States Coast Guard Instruction (COMDTINST) M16247.1D, Maritime Law Enforcement Manual.

32 

Chapter Five of the Maritime Law Enforcement Manual addresses the roles and responsibilities of 

the Coast Guard in counterdrug operations. The primary federal statute that the Coast Guard 

enforces in counterdrug operations is the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA).33 The 

MDLEA prohibits any person on board an U.S. vessel, or a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the 

U.S., to knowingly or intentionally manufacture or distribute, or to possess with the intent to 

manufacture or distribute, a controlled substance.34 The term “U.S. vessel” includes: 

•	 Federally documented or state numbered vessels; 

•	 Vessels owned in whole or in part by: 

•	 the U.S. or a territory, commonwealth, or possession of the U.S.; 

•	 a state or political subdivision thereof; 

•	 a citizen or national of the U.S.; or 

•	 a corporation created under the laws of the U.S. or any state, the District of Columbia, or 

any territory, commonwealth, or possession of the U.S.; and 

•	 U.S. documented vessels sold or registered in a foreign country in violation of U.S. law.35 

“Vessel subject to U.S. jurisdiction” includes a foreign vessel if located: 

•	 In U.S. customs waters; 

30 10 U.S.C. § 379(b). 

31 Id. § 379(c). 32 U.S. COAST GUARD MARITIME LAW ENFORCEMENT MANUAL, COMDTINST M16247, series (2010) (For Official 

Use Only manual) (copy on file with CLAMO) [hereinafter MLEM]. The MLEM is also available at the Maritime 

Operations Resources web portal at the CLAMO website (AKO account required). See also Memorandum from 

Commander, Atlantic Area, U.S. Coast Guard, to Commanding Officers, Regional TACLETs North, South, and Gulf, 

subject: Memorandum of Agreement Concerning Deployment of Law Enforcement Detachment (5 Aug. 1993) (on file 

with CLAMO). 

33 46 U.S.C. §§ 70501–70507 (2006). In 2010 Congress passed the Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act, 18 

U.S.C. § 2285 (the DTVIA) at the urging of the Coast Guard and DOJ. This law makes the operation of or embarkation 

in a stateless self-propelled semi-submersible or submersible vessel beyond any State’s territorial sea (or having crossed 

from one State’s territorial sea into another) a felony punishable by up to fifteen years in prison. Although not a drugtrafficking statute, per se, the Coast Guard enforces this new law to combat the threat posed by maritime drug 

traffickers who have been increasingly resorting to the use of semi-submersible vessels to transport multi-ton loads of 

cocaine to avoid detection. Many of the jurisdictional provisions and definitions in the MDLEA are included in the 

DTVIA as well. 

34 Id. § 1903. 35 Id. § 1903(b). 

Chapter 6 

95 Counterdrug Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

• On the high seas and the flag State has consented or waived objection to the enforcement of 

U.S. law; or 

• In the territorial waters of another nation and that coastal State consents to the enforcement of 

U.S. law.36 

U.S. Navy ships with Coast Guard LEDETs aboard remain under the operational control (OPCON) 

of the Unified Commander in whose area of responsibility the DoD asset is operating. OPCON is 

defined as “the authority to direct the activities of a unit in the performance of its operational 

mission and such additional tasks as may be assigned by competent authority; the organizational 

element with OPCON of a unit is the operational commander of that unit.”37 

When an U.S. Navy ship enters the boarding phase of a law enforcement operation, the U.S. Navy 

ship shifts tactical control (TACON) to the Coast Guard until the boarding phase is complete. 

TACON is defined as “the temporary authority to direct activities of a specific unit on a specific 

mission for a specific period of time; this authority is assigned by the operational commander and 

an organizational element with TACON of a unit is the tactical commander of that unit.”38 U.S. 

Navy ships transporting Coast Guard LEDETs under TACON of the Coast Guard will follow the 

Use-of-Force Policy issued by the Commandant, USCG regarding use of warning shots and 

disabling fire.39 

In addition to placing LEDETs on U.S. Navy ships, the Coast Guard also relies on extensive 

bilateral and multilateral agreements between the United States and other nations to place LEDETs 

on the ships of foreign countries. These agreements can take various forms—from standing formal 

memoranda of agreements to ad hoc verbal agreements.40 

The United States and most countries in South America, Central America and the Caribbean are 

parties to the U.N. Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic 

Substances. Article 17 of that Convention requires parties to cooperate with each other to suppress 

illicit trafficking by sea. Pursuant to this mandate, the United States has entered into dozens of 

bilateral agreements or understandings with partner states in the region. These standing bilateral 

maritime counterdrug agreements typically address various aspects of enforcement including: 

deployment of shipriders from foreign navies and coast guards on U.S. surface assets, over flight by 

U.S. air assets within the territory or territorial seas of foreign partners, patrols and pursuit of 

suspect vessels in the territorial seas of foreign partners, combined operations, and flag State 

authorization to board, search, seize, make arrests and procedures by which foreign partners may 

waive jurisdiction over vessels and persons in favor of prosecution in the United States when 

appropriate. As with all international agreements, these bilateral and multilateral agreements can 

36 Id. § 1903(c). 37 See MLEM, supra note 32, para. 2.E.1.e. 

38 Id. 39 CHAIRMAN JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, INSTR. 3121.01B, STANDING RULES OF ENGAGEMENT, Encl. H, Counterdrug 

Support Operations Outside the U.S. Territory, para. 1(b) (13 June 2005). CJCSI 3121.01B is classified in part. 

Enclosure H is confidential in part. The provision cited is unclassified. See also 10 U.S.C. § 637 (2006), Stopping 

vessels; immunity from firing at or into vessels. 

40 For a list of current counterdrug bilateral agreements, see USCG OPLAW FAST ACTION REFERENCE MATERIALS, 

series (2009) (For Official Use Only manual) (copy on file with CLAMO) [hereinafter FARM]. The FARM is also 

available at the Maritime Operations Resources web portal at the CLAMO website (AKO account required). 

Chapter 6 

Counterdrug Operations 96 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

only be negotiated with authorization from the U.S. Department of State.41 (See DOPLAW 

Handbook, Supp., App. 6-13, Sample LEDET MOA, for a sample bilateral agreement.) 

C. National Guard Support to Counterdrug Operations 

National Guard forces are authorized by 32 U.S.C. § 112(a) to use CD funds for “drug interdiction 

and counterdrug activities.” This includes: 

•	 Pay, travel, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities, travel, and related expenses, as 

authorized by state law, for National Guard personnel used for drug interdiction and 

counterdrug activities while not in federal service; 

•	 The operation and maintenance of National Guard equipment and facilities used for drug 

interdiction and counterdrug activities; and 

•	 The procurement of services and equipment, and the leasing of equipment, by the National 

Guard for the purpose of drug interdiction and counterdrug activities.42 

Funds provided by the Secretary of Defense under 32 U.S.C. § 112 are part of the DoD counterdrug 

appropriation and cannot be used for purposes other than the National Guard counterdrug support 

program. Authority to spend CD funds depends on whether the primary purpose of the mission is to 

conduct CD activities. Evidence that CD is a purpose, but not the primary purpose, is insufficient 

to justify the expenditure. For example, a Purpose Act violation occurred when the Texas National 

Guard used counterdrug funds in January 1993 in support of the joint ATF-FBI operation 

concerning the Branch Davidians near Waco, Texas. The finding was returned despite evidence 

that a former Branch Davidian had stated to the ATF that there was a methamphetamine lab in the 

compound, and David Koresh had stated to an undercover ATF agent that the compound would be 

an ideal location for a meth lab. The ADA violation was based on the fact that the operation’s 

primary purpose was to investigate potential federal firearms violations—not narcotics violations.43 

CD funds may also be used for the purpose of drug interdiction and counterdrug activities in which 

(1) drug traffickers use terrorism to further their aims of drug trafficking, or (2) terrorists benefit 

from or use drug trafficking to further their aims of drug trafficking.44 

In order to qualify for federal funding under 32 U.S.C. § 112(a), the Governor of the state 

requesting such funding must submit a state drug interdiction and counterdrug activities plan to the 

Secretary of Defense.45 A state drug interdiction and counterdrug activities plan shall: 

41 See MLEM, supra note 32, para. 5.B. & Encl. 4.
 42 Procurement of equipment cannot exceed $5,000 per purchase order unless approval is granted by the Secretary of
 

Defense. 32 U.S.C.A. § 112(a)(3) (2006). Further, equipment purchased, loaned, leased, or otherwise obtained using 

32 U.S.C. § 112 funds will only be used for the Counterdrug Support Program except in very limited circumstances. 

U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, NAT’L GUARD BUREAU REG. 500-2, NATIONAL GUARD COUNTERDRUG SUPPORT, paras. 7-10, 7­

11 (28 August 2008) [hereinafter NGR 500-2]. 

43 DA (FM&C) Report of Antideficiency Act Violation Case #95-09, 11 March 1997. 

44 Joint Pub 3-07.4, Joint Counterdrug Operations (13 June 2007) (defining narcoterrorism); NGR 500-2, supra note 

42, glossary (defining counternarcoterrorism); CNGB Memo, Implementation of Procedures for Handling Requests for
 

Counterdrug Narcoterrorist Support, 2 June 2006. 

45 State drug interdiction and counterdrug support plans must be submitted through the Counterdrug Office of the 

National Guard Bureau. NGR 500-2, supra note 42, para. 2-5. 

Chapter 6 

97 Counterdrug Operations 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

•	 Specify how personnel of the National Guard of that state are to be used in drug interdiction and 

counterdrug activities; 

•	 Certify that those operations are to be conducted at a time when the personnel involved are not 

in federal service; 

•	 Certify that participation by National Guard personnel in those operations is service in addition 

to training required under 32 U.S.C. § 502;46 

•	 Certify that any engineer-type activities (as defined by the Secretary of Defense) under the plan 

will be performed only by units and members of the National Guard; 

•	 Include a certification by that State Attorney General that the use of the National Guard for the 

activities proposed under the plan is authorized by, and is consistent with, state law; and 

•	 Certify that the Governor or a civilian law enforcement official of the state designated by the 

Governor has determined that any activities included in the plan that are carried out in 

conjunction with federal law enforcement agencies serve a state law enforcement purpose.47 

The National Guard Counterdrug Coordinators for each state or territory must submit their State 

Plan to the National Guard Bureau for review. The National Guard Bureau submits the State Plan, 

complete with original certifying signature from the respective Adjutant General, Attorney General, 

and Governor, to DASD/CN. DASD/CN reviews the State Plan and, in coordination with the 

Comptroller, ASD (HD & ASA), the Joint Staff, the Commander, NORTHCOM, and other 

appropriate offices within the department, recommends approval or rejection to the Secretary of 

Defense.48 

To ensure that the use of National Guard units and personnel participating in counterdrug operations 

does not degrade training and readiness, the following requirements apply in determining what 

activities National Guard personnel may perform: 

•	 The performance of the activities may not adversely affect the quality of that training or 

otherwise interfere with the ability of a member or unit of the National Guard to perform the 

military functions of the member or unit; 

•	 National Guard personnel will not degrade their military skills as a result of performing the 

activities; 

•	 The performance of the activities will not result in a significant increase in the cost of training; 

and, 

•	 In the case of drug interdiction and counterdrug activities performed by a unit organized to serve 

as a unit, the activities will support valid unit training requirements.49 

The Secretary of Defense will examine the state drug interdiction and counterdrug activities plan in 

consultation with the Director of National Drug Control Policy. However, if the Governor of a state 

submits a plan substantially similar to the one submitted the prior fiscal year, and funds were 

provided to the state under the prior plan, consultation by the Secretary of Defense with the Director 

of National Drug Control Policy is not required. National Guard units can execute only those 

46 See 32 U.S.C. § 502 (2006) (addressing annual drill and field exercise requirements of National Guard personnel). 47 Id. § 112(c). 

48 Memorandum, Deputy Secretary of Defense, Subject: Department Support to Domestic Law Enforcement Agencies
 

Performing Counternarcotics Activities (2 Oct 2003). 

49 32 U.S.C. § 112(b)(2)(C).
 

Chapter 6 

Counterdrug Operations 98 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

missions approved by the Secretary of Defense in the state drug interdiction and counterdrug 

activities plan. 

Although federally funded, National Guard members performing counterdrug missions under 32 

U.S.C. § 112 are under State command and control. In fact, 32 U.S.C. § 112(c)(2) specifically 

requires the state drug interdiction and counterdrug activities plan to certify that “operations are to 

be conducted at a time when the personnel involved are not in federal service.” However, 32 

U.S.C. § 112(b) also requires that CD personnel serve in a full-time National Guard duty (FTNGD) 

status pursuant to 32 U.S.C. § 502(f). As with all National Guard personnel performing duties 

pursuant to 32 U.S.C. §§ 115, 316, 502, 503, 504, or 505, National Guard members performing CD 

activities in FTNGD status are employees of the federal government for purposes of Federal Tort 

Claims Act50 coverage.51 If the appropriate United States Attorney determines that a Title 32 

National Guard member was acting within the scope of employment when an alleged tort occurred, 

then the plaintiff’s exclusive remedy would be against the United States, which would accordingly 

be substituted as the defendant in any FTCA litigation.52 Conversely, for actions not cognizable 

under the FTCA, such as a constitutional or Bivens53 action against a National Guard member in his 

or her individual capacity, the United States could not be substituted as the defendant in the action. 

In such cases, the National Guard member may request representation from the Department of 

Justice pursuant to 32 C.F.R. § 50.15 and AR 27-40, chapter 4 or AFI 51-301, chapter 1. The 

process of determining representation is separate and distinct from the determination of FTCA 

coverage. If representation is granted, National Guard personnel remain individually-named 

defendants in the action and are responsible for any criminal convictions, fines or civil judgments. 

The Department of Justice is not obligated to indemnify National Guard personnel for any adverse 

monetary judgments or sanctions in these cases, but may, in its sole discretion, do so upon 

request.54 

The Posse Comitatus Act does not apply to National Guard counterdrug missions performed under 

32 U.S.C. § 112, even though these units are performing missions using federal funds and operating 

under federal fiscal oversight.55 This allows Title 32 National Guard personnel more flexibility 

than Title 10 forces in conducting counterdrug missions. However, the National Guard Bureau has 

imposed several policy restrictions on National Guard counterdrug operations in NGR 500-2.56 As 

50 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671–2680. 

51 See id. § 2671 (defining “employee of the government”). 52 See id. § 2679(b). See also NGR 500-2, supra note 42, para. 2-4a (“National Guard members acting within the scope 

of their authority and performing approved support (listed in the Governor's State Plan and approved by the SECDEF) 

are immune from suit except for certain constitutional torts, i.e., when a negligent act or omission constitutes a violation 

of the constitutional rights of the injured party, including persons suspected of criminal activity, and certain intentional
 

torts, such as assault and battery, false arrest and imprisonment.”). 

53 Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 54 See 32 C.F.R. § 50.15(a)(8).
 

55 Gilbert v. United States, 165 F.3d 470, 473–474 (6th Cir. 1999) (Where a state used National Guardsmen for purpose 

of carrying out drug interdiction and counterdrug activities, in accordance with federal statute, the Guardsmen were 

found to be exempt from the Posse Comitatus Act); United States v. Benish, 5 F.3d 20, 25-26 (3rd Cir. 1993) (The use of 

a National Guard unit that was not in federal service for civilian law enforcement involving surveillance of possible 

drug operation was held not in violation of federal law, where under Pennsylvania law the Governor could place 

members of National Guard on special state duty to support drug interdiction programs). 

56 This regulation does not address National Guard counterdrug activities performed under the authority of Title 10, 

United States Code. 

Chapter 6 

99 Counterdrug Operations 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

a matter of policy, National Guard personnel will not directly participate in the arrest of suspects, 

conduct searches which include direct contact of National Guard members with suspects or the 

general public, or become involved in the chain of custody of any evidence, except in exigent 

circumstances, or when otherwise authorized.57 Exigent circumstances are defined as situations 

where immediate action is necessary to protect police officers, National Guard personnel, or other 

persons from death or serious injury; to prevent the loss or destruction of evidence; or to prevent the 

escape of a suspect already in custody.58 

The following missions have been approved for federal funding by the Secretary of Defense under 

32 U.S.C. § 112: 

•	 Counterdrug Coordination, Liaison, and Management – Planning and coordinating state 

counterdrug supply and demand reduction support; 

•	 Linguist Support – Providing transcription/translation of audio/video tapes, seized documents 

and other information media (active/real-time conversation monitoring or direct participation in 

interrogations is not allowed); 

•	 Investigative Case and Analyst Support – Assisting law enforcement agencies (LEAs) in the 

establishment of counterdrug intelligence systems/databases and providing intelligence analysis 

support; 

•	 Communications Support – Providing personnel to establish, operate and maintain 

communications stations, bases, and equipment in support of LEA counterdrug operations; 

•	 Operational/Investigative Case Support – Providing assistance to LEAs in developing 

investigations and cases for prosecution; 

•	 Engineer Support – Providing engineer support to LEAs and community organizations where 

the project has a counterdrug nexus; 

•	 Subsurface/Diver Support – Conducting subsurface inspections of commercial vessel hulls 

within U.S. territorial waters or maritime ports of entry through the use of sidescan sonobuoys 

or divers to detect alien devices or containers attached to vessel hulls, or other underwater 

activities; 

•	 Domestic Cannabis Suppression/Eradication Operations Support – Supporting LEA domestic 

cannabis suppression and eradication operations; 

•	 Transportation Support – Providing transportation (aerial, ground, or maritime) of LEA 

personnel/equipment, persons in LEA custody, seized property or contraband as part of ongoing time-sensitive counterdrug operations, when security or other special circumstances 

reasonably necessitate National Guard support and there is a counterdrug nexus; 

•	 Maintenance/Logistical Support – Providing maintenance/logistical support of LEA vehicles 

and equipment to enhance the counterdrug effectiveness of the supported agency; 

•	 Cargo/Mail Inspection – Assisting LEAs by inspecting cargo and mail; 

•	 Training LEA/Military Personnel – Training LEA/military personnel in military subjects and 

skills useful in the conduct of counterdrug operations or in the operation of equipment used in 

counterdrug operations; 

•	 Surface Reconnaissance – Reconnoitering or performing area observation by land or water to 

detect and report illegal drug activities that include, but are not limited to, cultivated marijuana, 

57 NGR 500-2, supra note 42, para. 2-1e. 58 Id. 

Chapter 6 

Counterdrug Operations 100 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

suspected isolated drug trafficking airstrips, drug drop zones, drug trafficking corridors, illegal 

drug laboratories, suspicious aircraft, watercraft, or motor vehicles; 

•	 Aerial Reconnaissance – Conducting reconnaissance/observation of airspace, maritime or 

surface areas (land and internal waterways of the U.S. and territories) for illegal drug activities 

which include, but are not limited to, cultivation of marijuana or delivery of illegal drugs;59 

•	 Drug Demand Reduction Support – Providing support to community based activities primarily 

designed to educate, train, or otherwise prevent drug abuse among youth, and providing 

information about drug abuse or drug abuse programs; 

•	 Drug Demand Reduction Education and Programs – Supporting community based activities that 

focus on educational institutions, or otherwise have an educational institution as the primary 

sponsor, and are primarily designed to educate, train, or otherwise prevent drug abuse; 

•	 Leadership Development – Supporting camps, retreats, seminars and programs, not primarily 

associated with educational institutions that focus on developing drug abuse prevention 

leadership skills in youth and adults; and 

•	 Coalition Development – Assisting in the development of functioning community-based 

coalitions organized to reduce the illegal use of legitimate drugs and the use of illegal drugs.60 

National Guard personnel carrying out the above missions serve in a support role to LEAs and will 

not be directly involved in law enforcement duties. Consequently, National Guard members will 

only be armed at the request of the supported law enforcement agency and after meeting certain 

criteria. A mission risk analysis will be conducted by The Adjutant General (TAG) of that State to 

determine whether National Guard personnel should be armed as a force protection measure.61 

Since National Guard personnel providing counterdrug support under 32 U.S.C. § 112 are acting 

under State command and control, each State National Guard promulgates its own Rules for the Use 

of Force (RUF), as they are now generally called in domestic operations. CJCSI 3121.01B, Encl. 

O, Counterdrug Support Operations Within U.S. Territory, is not applicable to the National Guard 

unless they are in federal service (Title 10 status). A sample National Guard RUF card is located in 

the DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 6-11, California National Guard Counterdrug Task Force 

Standing Rules of Engagement. Consequently, judge advocates must be aware of the application of 

the law of the state in which operations are being conducted.62 

If National Guard personnel are armed, NGR 500-2 requires the State’s TAG to consider the 

following: 

•	 All personnel authorized to carry firearms must have received qualification training and testing 

on the type of firearm to be carried, in accordance with current regulations. Training will 

include instruction on safety functions, security, capabilities, limitations, and maintenance of the 

59 An additional requirement for aerial reconnaissance (otherwise known as “Mission 5a”) is that at least one person
 

involved in either the operation or training of the mission must attend the National Counterdrug Civil-Military Institute 

(NICI) Mission 5a course. Id. para. 5-17. 60 See NGR 500-2, para. 2-7 for a detailed description of what each mission entails. 

61 Id. para. 3-6. This authority may be delegated in accordance with para. 3-6(b). 

62 Lieutenant Colonel Wendy A. Stafford, How to Keep Military Personnel from Going to Jail for Doing the Right 

Thing: Jurisdiction, ROE & the Rules of Deadly Force, ARMY LAW, Nov. 2000, at 1. 

Chapter 6 

101 Counterdrug Operations
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

firearms. Testing will include qualification firing in accordance with current qualification 

standards; 

•	 Arms and ammunition will be secured at all times in accordance with appropriate regulations 

and policies. Rounds will be chambered only on order of the commander/senior officer/senior 

noncommissioned officer present, in coordination and in conjunction with the supported LEA, 

except in cases of exigent circumstances; 

•	 Firearms will not be discharged from moving vehicles (except in self-defense or to defend other 

persons); 

•	 Pilots in command of aircraft have the authority to override an order to chamber rounds while 

on board an aircraft; 

•	 Possession or use of non-issued or personally owned firearms and/or ammunition during 

counterdrug support operations is prohibited. National Guard personnel will not accept offers of 

weapons or ammunition from LEAs except for use on LEA operated ranges for training 

purposes only. The only weapons used for counterdrug support operations will be federally 

owned military weapons listed on the unit’s property books; 

•	 Federally owned military weapons will not be secured in private dwellings at any time; 

•	 The counterdrug coordinator will direct additional weapons training when, in his judgment, it is 

advisable, regardless of the level of training indicated by training and qualification records; 

•	 National Guard units may use minimum force for the following purposes: 

•	 To defend themselves or other persons; 

•	 To protect property, or prevent loss/destruction of evidence; 

•	 To make arrests if they have arrest powers pursuant to state law and exigent circumstances 

require such action. 

•	 The discharge of any firearm is always considered deadly force; and 

•	 National Guard members will be thoroughly briefed on the Rules of Engagement and Use of 

Force prior to the commencement of any operation.63 

63 NGR 500-2, supra note 42, para. 3-6. 

Chapter 6 

Counterdrug Operations 102 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 7 

MILITARY SUPPORT TO SPECIAL EVENTS 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 422 - Use of Funds for Certain Incidental Purposes. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2012 - Support and Services for Eligible Organizations and Activities Outside the 

Department of Defense. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2554 - Equipment and other services: Boy Scout Jamborees. 

•	 PDD 62 - Protection Against Unconventional Threats to the Homeland and Americans 

Overseas, May 22, 1998. 

•	 HSPD 7 - Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection, December 17, 

2003. 

•	 HSPD 15/NSPD 46 - U.S. Strategy and Policy in the War on Terror (Classified), March 6, 2006. 

•	 DoDD 1100.20 - Support and Services for Eligible Organizations and Activities Outside the 

Department of Defense, April 12, 2004. 

•	 DoDD 2000.15 - Support to Special Events, December 8, 2003.1 

•	 Reese, Shawn, Congressional Research Service, RS 22754, National Special Security Events, 

March 19, 2008. 

A. Introduction 

The Department of Defense (DoD) supports a wide variety of special events held within the United 

States. There are two general types of support: support to designated special events under statutory 

authority and community support as part of innovative readiness training (IRT). Designated special 

events include the Boy Scout Jamboree and “National Special Security Events (NSSEs)” such as 

major sporting events, e.g. the Olympics, Presidential inaugurations, and international meetings like 

the G-8 summit.2

 The IRT program allows commanders to conduct training in the civilian 

community, but benefit to the community must be incidental to the training.3

 IRT support must 

provide a training benefit to the participating unit or individual. 

B. Designated Special Events 

10 U.S.C. § 2554 permits support for Boy Scout Jamborees.4 This provides the Secretary of 

Defense authority to lend or otherwise provide the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) with a variety of 

equipment to include cots, flags, tents, and other equipment to include expendable medical supplies 

without reimbursement. This support may be provided to the BSA in support of both national and 

world scout jamborees.5

 Further, if the Jamboree is conducted on a military installation, the 

1

 As of July 2011, the Department of Defense was finalizing a revision and replacement of DoDD 2000.15 with an 

Instruction, tentatively numbered DoDI 3025.gg. 

2 REESE, SHAWN, Cong. Research Serv., RS 22754, NATIONAL SECURITY SPECIAL EVENTS (2008), at 3-4.
 3

 Memorandum, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs), subject: Innovative Readiness 

Training (IRT), Encl. 1 (28 Mar. 2000) [hereinafter IRT Policy].
 4

 10 U.S.C. § 2554. Note that the section previously numbered as 2554 has been changed to 10 U.S.C. § 2564 and 

relates to the provisioning of DoD support to certain athletic events. These events are discussed infra. 5 See id. § 2554(a.). 

Chapter 7 

103 Military Support to Special Events 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Secretary may authorize logistical and personnel support on the military installation.6

 Certain 

expenses such as those associated with transportation must be reimbursed and in some cases a 

payment bond must be secured before the support is rendered.7

 Aside from Jamborees, other 

military support to the Boy Scouts is authorized under 10 U.S.C. § 508. This more generalized 

assistance, which also extends to other youth and charitable organizations, is discussed in Chapter 8 

infra. 

Congress has also authorized military support to certain sporting events, such as the Olympics or 

World Cup soccer.8

 In addition to sporting events, other special events may be designated by the 

Secretary of Defense for support.9

 Such support may be provided on a reimbursable basis or may 

be funded by specific appropriations.10 

1. Types of Events 

a. Sporting Events 

Support to certain sporting events is specifically authorized by 10 U.S.C. § 2564. Sporting events 

are planned programs of athletic competition and related activities.11 The authorizing legislation 

specifically mentions the World Cup Soccer Games, the Goodwill Games, and the Olympics, but 

other events may be authorized when special security and safety needs exist.12 Other sporting 

events previously supported include the World Alpine Ski Championships and the Special 

Olympics. Military forces also provided extensive support during the 1996 and 2002 Olympic 

Games held in Atlanta, Georgia and Salt Lake City, Utah, respectively.13 

On January 16, 2001, Commander, U.S. Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) formed Joint Task ForceOlympics (JTF-O) in support of the Salt Lake City Winter Games.14 JTF-O received requests for 

assistance from the U.S. Olympic Planning Committee and the Salt Lake Olympic Planning 

6 See id. § 2554(g). 

7 10 U.S.C. § 2554(b–f). 

8 10 U.S.C. § 2564 (a) states: 

Security and Safety Assistance. At the request of a federal, state, or local government agency 

responsible for providing law enforcement services, security services, or safety services, the Secretary 

of Defense may authorize the commander of a military installation or other facility of the Department 

of Defense or the commander of a specified or unified combatant command to provide assistance for 

the World Cup Soccer Games, the Goodwill Games, the Olympics, and any other civilian sporting 

event in support of essential security and safety at such event, but only if the Attorney General 

certifies that such assistance is necessary to meet essential security and safety needs. 

Note. This section was previously numbered as § 2554 until 2000.
 9

 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 2000.15, SUPPORT TO SPECIAL EVENTS, para. 3.1 (21 Nov. 1994) [hereinafter DoDD 

2000.15]. As noted in note 1, this Directive is currently pending revision and may be replaced in the near future. 10 Id. para. 4.4.
 11 DoDD 2000.15, supra note 9, para. 4.4.
 12 10 U.S.C. § 2564(a). 13 See U.S. Forces Command, Slide Presentation, 2001 Winter Olympic Games, Joint Task Force-Olympics 

FORSCOM Augmentation (22 Feb. 2001) [hereinafter FORSCOM Presentation].
 14 Message, 181815Z Jan 01, Commander in Chief, Joint Forces Command, subject: USCINCJFCOM JTF-Olympics 

Stand Up Announcement (18 Jan. 2001).
 

Chapter 7 

Military Support to Special Events 104 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Committee.15 Routine support approved by the Secretary of the Army for this event included 

aviation, communications, explosive ordnance disposal, physical security, and temporary 

facilities.16 With the establishment of U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) on September 

11, 2003, similar future support missions are now assigned to USNORTHCOM. 

b. Non-athletic Events 

The Secretary of Defense may also designate non-athletic events to receive support. Non-athletic 

events include large events, such as the World’s Fairs, the Universal Postal Union Congress, and the 

International Special Olympics.17 Aside from the Boy Scouts Jamboree, DoD may also support 

Department of Homeland Security-designated “national special security events” when tasked to do 

so. 

(1) Events Not Declared National Special Security Events 

The Secretary of Defense may designate “non-athletic international or national events to receive 

support.”18 The International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group meeting of April 2000 was a 

non-athletic event approved for support but not designated a national special security event.19 The 

G-8 meeting of 2004 was also designated to receive such support. 

(2) National Special Security Events 

Pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7 (HSPD-7), the Secretary, DHS, makes the 

final determination as to whether to designate an event as a national special security event 

(NSSE).20 This determination is made after consultation with the Homeland Security Council.21 

Other events may be categorized through the use of the Special Events Assessment Rating (SEAR) 

process used by the Department of Homeland Security to determine other events that may require 

federal support. With respect to NSSEs, the U.S. Secret Service is the lead federal agency 

responsible for coordinating, planning, exercising, and implementing security for NSSEs.22 

Military assets provided in support of NSSEs may include explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) 

teams, technical escort units (TEU),23 geospatial intelligence support,24 and Chemical/Biological 

Immediate Response Forces (C/BIRF).25 

15 FORSCOM Presentation, supra note 13. 16 Message 141555Z Mar 00, Commander in Chief, Joint Forces Command, subject: USCINCJFCOM 2000 XIX
 

Olympics PLANORD Feedback (14 Mar. 2000).
 17 DoDD 2000.15, supra note 9, para. 3.1.
 18 Id. 19 U.S. Forces Command, Operational Briefing, International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group Spring Meeting 

11-17 April 2000 (14 Apr. 2000) (classified FOUO).
 20 HSPD-7, Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection, para. 26 (December 17, 2003). 21 Id. 

22 U.S. Secret Service Statement Before the House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime (24 June 1999) 

(Brian L. Stafford, Director, U.S. Secret Service). See also REESE, SHAWN, Cong. Research Serv., RS 22754, 

NATIONAL SECURITY SPECIAL EVENTS (2009), at summary; UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, National Special Security 

Events, available at http://www.secretservice.gov/nsse.shtml (last visited Jun. 30, 2011). 23 TEU teams are capable of detecting, rendering safe, and transporting chemical and biological devices. 

Chapter 7 

105 Military Support to Special Events 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

The designation of an NSSE by the Secretary, DHS, is based upon an analysis of several factors. 

These factors include: the anticipated attendance of United States and foreign officials; the size of 

the event; and, the significance of the event to include the event’s historical, political, or symbolic 

importance.26 Examples of NSSEs receiving DoD support include the NATO 50th Anniversary 

Summit, the 1999 visit to the United States by Pope John Paul II, and the World Trade Organization 

(WTO) meeting held in Seattle in 1999, and the Republican and Democratic National Conventions 

in 2004 and 2008, respectively.27 

Further, state operational plans may be triggered by such a designation. For example, prior to the 

1999 WTO meeting in Seattle, the Washington National Guard conducted activities pursuant to the 

Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan in support of the WTO. 

For a list of designated NSSEs in recent years, see Figure 7-1 below. 

Event Location Date 

World Energy Council Meeting Houston, TX Sept.13–17, 1998 

NATO 50th Anniversary Celebration Washington, DC Apr. 23–25, 1999 

World Trade Organization Meeting Seattle, WA Nov. 29–Dec. 3, 1999 

State of the Union Address Washington, DC Jan. 27, 2000 

International Monetary Fund Meeting Washington, DC Apr. 14–17, 2000 

International Naval Review (OpSail) New York, NY Jul. 3–9, 2000 

Republican National Convention Philadelphia, PA Jul. 29–Aug. 4, 2000 

Democratic National Convention Los Angeles, CA Aug. 14–16, 2000 

Presidential Inauguration Washington, DC Jan. 20, 2001 

Presidential Address to Congress Washington, DC Feb. 27, 2001 

United Nations General Assembly 56 New York, NY Nov. 10–16, 2001 

State of the Union Address Washington, DC Jan. 29, 2002 

Super Bowl XXXVI New Orleans, LA Feb. 3, 2002 

Winter Olympic Games Salt Lake City, UT Feb. 8–24, 2002 

Super Bowl XXXVII San Diego, CA Jan. 26, 2003 

State of the Union Address Washington, DC Jan. 20, 2004 

Super Bowl XXXVIII Houston, TX Feb. 1, 2004 

Sea Island G8 Summit Sea Island, GA Jun. 8–10, 2004 

President Reagan State Funeral Washington, DC Jun. 11, 2004 

Democratic National Convention Boston, MA Jul. 26–29, 2004 

24 10 U.S.C. § 442, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, Missions. 25 For an excellent overview of the process from an interagency perspective, see Briefing, “National Special Security 

Events,” prepared by USNORTHCOM and the FBI, Miami, Florida (4 March 2008) (on file with CLAMO). 26 Reese, supra note 2, at 2.
 

27 See, e.g., Message, 180715Z Oct 99, Department of the Army, subject: World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial 

Conference (18 Oct. 1999). 

Chapter 7 

Military Support to Special Events 106 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Republican National Convention New York, NY Aug. 30–Sep. 2, 2004 

Presidential Inauguration Washington, DC Jan. 20, 2005 

State of the Union Address Washington, DC Feb. 2, 2005 

Super Bowl XXXIX Jacksonville, FL Feb. 6, 2005 

Super Bowl XL Detroit, MI Feb. 5, 2006 

President Ford State Funeral Washington, DC Jan. 3, 2007 

Super Bowl XLI Miami Gardens, FL Feb. 4, 2007 

State of the Union Address Washington, DC Jan. 28, 2008 

Democratic National Convention Denver, CO Aug. 25–28, 2008 

Republican National Convention Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN Sept. 1–4, 2008 

G-20 Economic Summit Washington, DC Nov. 14–15, 2008 

Presidential Train Stop Tour Philadelphia, PA Jan. 17, 2009 

Presidential Train Stop Tour Wilmington, DE Jan. 17, 2009 

Presidential Train Stop Tour Baltimore, MD Jan. 17, 2009 

Lincoln Memorial Rally Washington, DC Jan. 18, 2009 

Presidential Inauguration Washington, DC Jan. 20, 2009 

State of the Union Address Washington, DC Feb. 24, 2009 

Super Bowl XLIII Tampa Bay, FL Feb. 1, 2009 

G-20 Summit Pittsburgh, PA Sept. 24–25, 2009 

State of the Union Address Washington, DC Jan. 27, 2010 

The Nuclear Summit Washington, DC Apr. 12–13, 2010 

State of the Union Address Washington, DC Jan. 25, 2011 

Figure 7-1. National Special Security Events from 1998 to January 25, 2011.28 

2. Requests for Support 

a. Processing Requests for Support 

There are a variety of special events, each with their own legal support authorities and policies. 

Judge advocates must carefully analyze requests, approvals, and types of support when advising 

commanders on these kinds of operations. 

Requests for military support to sporting-related special events are made by the federal, state, or 

local agency responsible for providing law enforcement, security, or safety services for the event.29 

Often, this means that local police or a FBI field office requests the military support. The Attorney 

General must then certify that the specific categories of support are “necessary to meet essential 

28 Information in Figure 7-1 was collected from two sources. See Reese, supra note 2; E-mail from Natalie Lundin, 

Congressional Affairs Liaison, U.S. Secret Service, to Lieutenant Benedict Gullo, Ctr. for Law and Military Operations, 

U.S. Army (Jun. 30, 2011, 10:01 EST) (on file with CLAMO). 

29 10 U.S.C. § 2554(a). 

Chapter 7
 

107
 Military Support to Special Events 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

security and safety needs.”30 Once a request is certified, the support is coordinated through the 

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs (ASD(HD & 

ASA)) and the Joint Director of Military Support (JDOMS). A 2003 Deputy Secretary of Defense 

Memorandum transferred management and coordination of DoD support for these missions from 

the Secretary of the Army to ASD(HD & ASA).31 

Further, upon the designation of an NSSE by the DHS Secretary, security support for the event is 

coordinated through a “unified command model” that includes representatives of all agencies at all 

levels of government.32 Lessons learned from these events is collected by the U.S. Secret Service 

and used to train federal, state, and local law enforcement and public safety officials who respond to 

NSSEs.33 DoD support to NSSEs are authorized pursuant to DoDD 2000.15 and may include 

support such as equipment, personnel, technical, or managerial advice or guidance.34 

b. Types of Support 

In addition to security or safety based assistance that is most commonly requested, other types of 

military support may also be authorized.35 Some of the other types of assistance that may be 

authorized include equipment, personnel, technical support, managerial advice, or guidance.36 This 

“logistically-focused” assistance is provided only to the extent such assistance cannot be reasonably 

provided by an outside source and such assistance does not adversely affect military preparedness.37 

Security or safety-related support has precedence over logistical assistance.38 

c. Funding Support 

Military support may be provided on a reimbursable or non-reimbursable basis. Logistical and 

security support for international sporting competitions may be paid, in part, from the support for 

international sporting competitions (SISC) defense account.39 Organizations requesting logistically 

focused assistance for other types of special events must agree to reimburse DoD.40 Such assistance 

must be reimbursed in accordance with applicable laws.41 

Since FY2006, Congress has provided specific appropriations to fund support to NSSEs. Further, in 

additional to general funding for NSSEs that began in FY2006, Congress has also designated funds 

30 Id. 31 Memorandum, Deputy Secretary of Defense, subject: Implementation Guidance Regarding the Office of the
 

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense (25 Mar. 2003). 32 CRS Report, National Security Special Events, supra note 2, at 3.
 33 Id. 34 DoDD 2000.15, Support to Special Events, at para. 3.1 to 3.2 (November 21, 2004). Although the focus of the 

Directive is primarily sporting events, it also specifically includes “non-athletic special events” at paragraph 3.1. 35 10 U.S.C. § 2564(b). 36 DoDD 2000.15, supra note 9, para. 3.2.
 37 10 U.S.C. § 2564 (b)(1) & (2). 

38 DoDD 2000.15, supra note 9, para. 4.3.
 39 Pub. L. 104-208, div. A, title V, § 5802, 110 Stat. 3009-522 (2006). 

40 10 U.S.C. § 2564 (b)(3). 

41 10 U.S.C. § 377; U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, REG. 7000.14-R, DEPT. OF DEFENSE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
 

REGULATION (June 2000).
 

Chapter 7 

Military Support to Special Events 108 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

for specified NSSEs since 2004. NSSEs receiving specific appropriations include the Presidential 

Nominating Conventions for both parties in 2004 and 2008. 

C. Innovative Readiness Training 

Through “innovative readiness training” (IRT), military units and personnel can sometimes be used 

to assist eligible organizations and activities in “addressing community and civic needs” in the 

United States, to include U.S. territories and possessions.42 IRT provides the military the 

opportunity to satisfy valid unit and individual training requirements that relate to the military skills 

of requested individual military members and which provide a direct and lasting benefit to our 

communities.43 Secondary purposes includes building unit and individual morale, generating 

positive public support for the military and its capabilities, and enhancing recruiting and retention 

efforts. 

The IRT Program is the predominate way for commanders to conduct military training in the 

civilian community while simultaneously providing support and services to civil authorities and 

other eligible civilian organizations and activities.44 IRT is usually conducted by local combat 

support units and individuals off-base and within the requesting communities throughout. Although 

IRT missions simultaneously support the unit and the local community, the regulations require that 

steps be taken to ensure that IRT activities do not impermissibly compete with local commercial 

enterprises. This is accomplished by either a determination that there is no reasonably available 

commercial alternative, or, by providing a certification of non-competition from the requesting 

official that “the commercial entity that would otherwise provide the services agrees to the 

provision of such services by the armed forces.”45 

IRT projects include, but are not limited to, constructing rural roads, providing medical and dental 

care to medically underserved communities, and small building and warehouse construction or reassembly. While active components may conduct IRT programs, the National Guard and Reserve 

elements primarily provide such support. 

1. Innovative Readiness Training Procedures 

Military units may provide support and services to certain eligible organizations in the United 

States, its territories and possessions, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.46 Such assistance 

must be provided incidental to training or be otherwise authorized by law.47 Assistance is primarily 

42 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 1100.20, SUPPORT AND SERVICES FOR ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS AND ACTIVITIES 

OUTSIDE THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (12 Apr. 2004) [hereinafter DoDD 1100.20], para. 4.1. DoDD 1100.20
 

implements 10 U.S.C. § 2012.
 43 Id. paras. 4.4.2.1.1–4.4.2.1.2.
 44 10 U.S.C. § 2012; implemented by DODD 1100.20, supra note 42. For an excellent overview of this program and its
 

procedures, see Lieutenant Commander W. Kent Davis, Innovative Readiness Training Under 10 U.S.C. § 2012:
 

Understanding the Congressional Model for Civil-Military Projects, ARMY LAW., Jul. 2001, at 21. Military training in
 

support of certain community and charitable organizations can also be accomplished through 32 U.S.C. § 508 and U.S.
 

DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.17, CIVIL-MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN YOUTH AND CHARITABLE
 

ORGANIZATIONS (16 DEC 2004), discussed further in Chapter 8.
 45 DoDD 1100.20, supra note 42, paragraph 4.4.1.2.
 

46 10 U.S.C. § 2012 (2006); DoDD 1100.20, supra note 42. 47 10 U.S.C. § 2012(a). 

Chapter 7 

109 Military Support to Special Events 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

provided by combat service support units, combat support units, and personnel serving in the areas 

of health-care services, general engineering and infrastructure support, and assistance services.48 

a. Requests for Assistance 

Requests for assistance must come from a “responsible official” of an “eligible organization.”49 A 

responsible official is “an individual authorized to represent the organization or activity regarding 

the matter of assistance to be provided.”50 There are three categories of eligible organizations. Any 

federal, regional, state, or local government entity is an eligible organization.51 Eligible 

organizations also include youth and charitable organizations as specified in 32 U.S.C. § 508. 

Finally, an entity can be approved as an eligible organization by the Secretary of Defense on a caseby-case basis.52 

The request for IRT assistance must specify that the requested assistance is not reasonably available 

from a commercial entity.53 In determining whether assistance from a commercial entity is 

reasonably available, it is permissible to consider whether the requesting organization “would be 

able, financially or otherwise, to address the specific civic or community need(s) without the 

assistance of the Armed Forces.”54 If commercial assistance is reasonably available, the requesting 

individual must certify the commercial entity agrees to the provision of such services by the 

military.55 An outstanding resource for current materials to support an IRT request can be accessed 

via the internet at http://irt.defense.gov/. This site maintains current forms and other materials of 

interest to those seeking to process an IRT application. 

b. IRT Program Assistance-Nature and Requirements 

An organization may request Innovative Readiness Training assistance from a military unit or 

individual members. However, the requested IRT assistance must meet three requirements. First, it 

must be related to military training. In the case of a military unit, the requested assistance must 

accomplish valid unit training requirements (there is an exception to this particular requirement 

discussed below).56 Innovative Readiness Training projects must support a unit’s wartime METL. 

In the case of assistance by an individual military member, the requested assistance must involve 

tasks directly related to the individual’s military occupational specialty (MOS).57 Second, providing 

the assistance cannot adversely affect the quality of training or otherwise interfere with a unit or its 

48 DoDD 1100.20, supra note 42, para. 4.2.
 49 10 U.S.C. § 2012(c)(1).
 50 DoDD 1100.20, supra note 42, para. 4.4.1.1.
 51 10 U.S.C § 2012(e)(1).
 52 Id. § 2012(e)(3). 53 Id. § 2012(c)(2). 54 DoDD 1100.20, supra note 42, para. 4.4.1.2.
 55 10 U.S.C. § 2012(c)(2); DoDD 1100.20, supra note 42, para. 4.4.1.2.
 

56 Id. § 2012(d)(1)(A)(i).
 57 Id. § 2012(d)(1)(A)(ii). 

Chapter 7 

Military Support to Special Events 110 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

members’ abilities to perform military functions.58 Third, providing the assistance cannot result in 

a significant increase in training costs.59 

There is one exception to the requirement that requested IRT assistance must accomplish valid unit 

training requirements. In cases where the assistance consists primarily of military manpower and 

will not exceed 100 man-hours, the assistance need not accomplish unit training requirements.60 In 

such cases, volunteers will meet manpower requests, and assistance other than manpower will be 

extremely limited.61 Military vehicles may only be used, for instance, to provide transportation of 

personnel to and from the work site.62 The use of military aircraft is prohibited in these instances. 

The second and third requirements must still be met. 

2. Legal Considerations for IRT Projects 

a. Approval Authority for IRT Projects63 

The Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense, Reserve Affairs (OASD/RA) retains approval for all 

IRT projects that involve additional funding from OASD/RA, and all projects that require Office of 

the Secretary of Defense General Counsel’s review of eligibility.64 All IRT project requests 

received directly from requestors that lack military unit sponsors must also be forwarded to 

OASD/RA.65 Major Commands (MACOMs) generally approve other IRT projects. For projects 

that do not require additional funding or OSD review, the Office, Chief Army Reserve and the 

Army National Guard are considered MACOMs. A general officer or equivalent approval signature 

is required for all IRT requests.66 Additional requirements may exist if the proposed IRT project 

crosses multiple fiscal years.67 

b. Processing Requests for IRT Projects 

(1) How the IRT Project Request Process Begins 

A representative from an eligible organization approaches a commander or command representative 

with a concept for a project. The project concept must address a need that is not otherwise being 

met. The commander evaluates the project to determine whether it is compatible with unit or 

individual METL training requirements. If the project is compatible, the commander than must 

determine the feasibility of using the project as a training exercise. 

58 Id. § 2012 (d)(1)(B). 

59 Id. § 2012 (d)(1)(C). 60 Id. § 2012 (d)(2). 61 DoDD 1100.20, supra note 42, para. 4.4.2.1.3.
 

62 Id. 63 IRT Policy, supra note 3, encls. 1 & 2.
 64 IRT projects requiring OSD/RA approval include those which seek additional funding from OSD, seek to reallocate 

IRT funds to another IRT project, or involve requesting entities that need to be assessed for eligibility on a case-by-case 

basis. 

65 IRT Policy, supra note 3, encls. 1 & 2.
 

66 Id. encls. 1 & 3. 67 Id. 

Chapter 7 

111 Military Support to Special Events 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

(2) Contents of IRT Project Requests 

If the commander determines the proposed IRT project is feasible as a training exercise, the 

commander works with the requestor to assemble the IRT project request. An IRT project request 

must contain a cost analysis of the proposed project. The cost analysis includes total program costs 

and identifies whether the costs are borne by military department accounts or defense-wide 

accounts. The requesting commander must certify that the proposed project will not increase the 

cost of the training above the amount the event would cost if it were conducted independent of an 

IRT project. The IRT project request must contain a certification of non-competition. The 

certification of non-competition states that the requested assistance is not reasonably available from 

a commercial entity, or the existing commercial entities agree to the provision of such services by 

the military. The IRT project request must also contain an environmental assessment. IRT medical 

project proposals have additional submission requirements.68 

(3) IRT Project Requests--The Review Process 

All IRT project requests must be reviewed for full compliance with applicable guidelines and law. 

All IRT project requests must be reviewed and endorsed by a Staff Judge Advocate or legal officer, 

a U.S. Property and Fiscal Officer or Federal Budget Officer, and Plans, Operations and Training 

officials.69 Depending on the nature of assistance requested, additional endorsements may be 

required from medical, dental, or nursing officials. If applicable, the command may inform and 

request endorsement from the State Adjutant General of the project state or intergovernmental 

agencies.70 

c. Claims Arising From IRT Projects 

Claims involving Active Duty, Reserve, or National Guard Soldiers that arise from IRT projects are 

cognizable under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) despite the fact that a non-DoD or private 

entity derives a benefit from the project. IRT projects are conducted in a federally funded training 

status under Title 10 or Title 32 status.71 Community assistance undertaken by National Guard 

units that are not IRT projects is accomplished in a state active duty (SAD) status. Claims 

generated incident to projects accomplished in SAD status are solely a state responsibility. 

68 See Memorandum, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, Subject: Innovative Readiness 

Training (IRT) Requirements for Certification of Non-Competition (dated 30 April 2002), attached guidelines, at 2.
 69 Id. attached guidelines, at 1. 

70 Id. attached guidelines, at 2. 71 Id. attached guidelines, at 1. 

Chapter 7 

Military Support to Special Events 112 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 8 

MISCELLANEOUS DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 422 - Use of Funds for Certain Incidental Purposes 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2012 - Support and Services for Eligible Organizations and Activities Outside DoD 

•	 32 U.S.C. § 508 - Assistance for Certain Youth and Charitable Organizations 

•	 50 U.S.C. § 404e - National Mission of National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency 

•	 HSPD-7 - Critical Infrastructure, Identification, Prioritization, and Protection, December 17, 

2003. 

•	 EO 12241 - National Contingency Plan (NCP) 

•	 EO 12333 - United States Intelligence Activities 

•	 EO 12580 - Superfund Implementation 

•	 EO 12656 - Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities 

•	 EO 12657 - Federal Emergency Management Agency Assistance In Emergency Preparedness 

Planning At Commercial Nuclear Power Plants 

•	 Director of Central Intelligence Directive (DCID)1/8 - Management of National Imagery, 

Imagery Intelligence, Geospatial, March 21, 2001. 

•	 DoDD 3020.26 - Department of Defense Continuity Programs, January 9, 2009 

•	 DoDD 3020.36 - Assignment of National Security Emergency Preparedness, November 2, 1988. 

Responsibilities to DoD Components, November 2, 1988 (amended by Change 1, March 12, 

1993). 

•	 DoDD 3025.13 - Employment of Department of Defense Resources in Support of the United 

States Secret Service, September 13, 1985. 

•	 DoDD 3025.18 – Defense Support of Civil Authorities, December 19, 2010. 

•	 DoDD 3150.8 - DoD Response to Radiological Accidents, June 13, 1996. 

•	 DoD 3150.8-M - Nuclear Weapon Accident Response Procedures (NARP), February 22, 2005. 

•	 DoDD 4500.9E - Transportation and Traffic Management, September 11, 2007. 

•	 DoDD 5030.50 - Employment of Department of Defense Resources in Support of the United 

States Postal Service, April 13, 1972. 

•	 DoDD 5105.60 - National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), July 29, 2009. 

•	 DoDD 5230.16 - Nuclear Accident and Incident Public Affairs (PA) Guidance, December 20, 

1993. 

•	 DoDD 6000.12 - Health Services Operations and Readiness, April 29, 1996. 

•	 National Military Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction (CJCS), February 13, 2006. 

•	 AR 95-1 - Flight Regulations, November 12, 2008. 

•	 AR 500-3 - U.S. Army Continuity of Operations Program Policy and Planning, April 18, 2008. 

•	 NGR 500-1/ANGI 10-8101, National Guard Domestic Operations, June 13, 2008. 

•	 Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Preliminary Report on Literature Search for Legal Weapons 

of Mass Destruction Seminars, March 26, 2002. 

A. Introduction 

Domestic support operations supplement the efforts and resources of state and local governments, 

and include a variety of lesser-known types of support. While Field Manual 3-07, Stability 

Chapter 8 

113 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Operations and Support Operations,

1

 includes responses to natural and man-made disasters, 

military assistance to civil disturbances, counterdrug activities, combating terrorism, and support to 

law enforcement, this chapter focuses on support missions not previously discussed in this 

Handbook. 

B. Disaster and Domestic Emergency Assistance 

Disaster assistance may include any emergency which endangers life and property, disrupts normal 

governmental functions, or results in suffering and damage, of such a magnitude that state and local 

resources are overwhelmed.2

 An emergency is any occurrence, including natural disaster, military 

attack, technological emergency, or other emergency that seriously threatens U.S. national 

security.3

 Emergencies include man-made emergencies, such as chemical spills, nuclear incidents, 

large explosions, postal strikes, mass immigration, and prison riots or other form of civil 

disturbance. Some of these emergencies are discussed below. 

1. Military Assistance to Safety and Traffic 

The Military Assistance to Safety and Traffic (MAST) program is designed to “assist civilian 

communities in providing medical emergency helicopter services beyond the capability of the 

community.”4

 Further, the Secretary of the Army serves as the DoD Executive Agent for the 

MAST program.5

 DoD support to MAST is governed by DoD Directive (DoDD) 4500.9E, 

Transportation and Traffic Management.

6

 In response to a request from civilian authorities, 

military medical helicopter units may provide emergency air evacuation and recovery assistance if 

local civilian resources are not available or are not sufficient to respond to emergencies.7 

Circumstances for which military support is envisioned are:8 

1

 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, FIELD MANUAL3-07, STABILITY OPERATIONS (Oct. 2008) [hereinafter FM 3-07]. Upon release 

which is expected during 2010, judge Advocates should consult, U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, FIELD MANUAL3-28, CIVIL 

SUPPORT OPERATIONS. 

2 Id. 

3 Exec. Order No. 12656, 3 C.F.R. 585 (1988) [hereinafter EO 12656], in pertinent part states: 

Section 101. National Security Emergency Preparedness Policy: (a) The policy of the United States is 

to have sufficient capabilities at all levels of government to meet essential defense and civilian needs 

during any national security emergency. A national security emergency is any occurrence, including 

natural disaster, military attack, technological emergency, or other emergency, that seriously degrades 

or seriously threatens the national security of the United States. Policy for national security 

emergency preparedness shall be established by the President. Pursuant to the President’s direction, 

the National Security Council shall be responsible for developing and administering such policy. All 

national security emergency preparedness activities shall be consistent with the Constitution and laws 

of the United States and with preservation of the constitutional government of the United States. 

See also 42 U.S.C. § 5121(2). 4

 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Dir. 4500.9E, Transportation and Traffic Management at E4.2.1 (11 Sept. 2007) [hereinafter 

DoDD 4500.9E]. Note that U.S. Dep’t of Army, Reg. 500-4/U.S. Dep’t of Air Force, Reg. 64-1, Military Assistance to
 

Safety and Traffic (MAST) (15 Jan. 1982) has been rescinded.
 5 Id. para. 1.4.
 6 Id. 

7 Id. para. E.4.2.1. 8 Id. para. E.4.3.1. 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 114 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 Those of a life-saving nature; 

•	 Those specifically authorized by statute; 

•	 Those in direct support of a DoD Mission; 

•	 Those requested by an Agency head pursuant to 31 U.S.C. §§ 1535–36; 

•	 Medical evacuations pursuant to the provisions of DoDD 6000.11, “Patient Movement,” 

September 9, 1998;9 and, 

•	 As authorized and funded pursuant to DoDD 7000.14-R, “Department of Defense Financial 

Management Regulations (FMRs), Volumes 11A, 11B, and 15.10 

Military support is subject to the following limitations: 

•	 Assistance may be provided only in areas where military units able to provide such assistance 

regularly are assigned. 

•	 Military units shall not be transferred from one area to another for providing such assistance. 

•	 Assistance may be provided only to the extent that it does not interfere with the performance of 

the military mission. 

•	 The provision of assistance shall not cause any increase in funds required for DoD operation. 

•	 The Secretary of Defense, or designee, shall be the final decision authority for commitment of 

DoD resources to the MAST program. 

•	 DoD costs incurred in the program shall be funded by the Military Departments within their 

annual training program.11 

Military units shall not perform emergency medical evacuation missions if support can be provided 

by civilian contractors.12 

DoD assets provide interim support until civilian assets become available.13 Medical helicopter 

units must operate within their allocated training hour program.14 The Secretary of Defense or his 

designee is the final decision authority for commitment of resources to the MAST program.15 

DoDD 4500.09E provides that assistance “may be provided only to the extent that it does not 

interfere with the performance of the military mission.”16 

2. Search and Rescue Operations 

To the extent possible, the armed forces traditionally provide aviation assistance to civilians only 

during times of disaster or distress. For example, during a Stafford Act incident, DoD may provide 

search and rescue (SAR) support following a request by FEMA, directed by JDOMS, and approved 

9 Id. para. E.4.3.3.1. 10 Id. para. E.4.3.2.
 11 Id. paras. E.4.2.3.1–E4.2.3.6.
 12 Id. para. E.4.2.1. 13 Id. E.4.2.2. 14 Id. E.4.2.3.6. 

15 Id. E.4.2.3.5. 16 Id. E.4.2.3.3. 

Chapter 8 

115 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

by SECDEF.17 However, local commanders may also provide SAR support when an “imminent[ly] 

serious” threat to “public health and safety” exists and time does not permit prior approval.18 

The Civil Air Patrol (CAP), a volunteer civilian SAR organization, provides SAR services as an 

official auxiliary of the U.S. Air Force and represents the primary SAR resource available to the 

civil sector. Under the National Response Framework (NRF), FEMA is the primary agency for 

Emergency Support Function (ESF) 9, Urban Search & Rescue.19 

3. Employment of DoD Resources in Support of the U.S. Postal Service 

When a postal work stoppage disrupts mail service on a national, regional, or local basis, DoD may 

be directed to support the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) through an interdepartmental transfer of 

services.20 When ordered by the President, DoD may be called upon to provide sufficient materials, 

supplies, equipment, services, and personnel to enable the USPS to safeguard, process, and deliver 

the mail in areas affected by postal work stoppages.21 

Authority to support the USPS rests in the President’s authority to use the armed forces to prevent 

interference with transporting the mail22 and the authority for interdepartmental transfer of services 

and equipment prescribed by the Economy Act23 and implemented by DoD Instruction 4000.19, 

Interservice and Intragovernmental Support.

24 Upon Presidential declaration of a national 

emergency, selective mobilization of the RC to support the USPS is authorized by 10 U.S.C. § 

12301.25 Army and Air National Guard units may be called under authority granted in 10 U.S.C. § 

12406. Consistent with this use of authority, EO 13527 Establishing Federal Capability for the 

Timely Provision of Medical Countermeasures Following a Biological Attack (Dec. 30, 2009) 

directs the integration of DoD into plans to provide support to the USPS in delivering medical 

countermeasures in the event of biological attack.26 

4. National Disaster Medical System 

A major natural disaster can produce casualties far beyond the treatment capability of local medical 

support. Additionally, medical and health facilities and assets may not escape the effects of a 

catastrophic natural disaster. The National Disaster Medical System (NDMS), a national medical 

17 DoDD 4515.13-R Air Transportation Eligibility, (Nov. 1994), through change 3, April 9, 1998, para. C5.7; see also
 

ESF #9.
 18 Id. at C.10.11. 

19 U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, National Response Framework (Jan. 2008) [hereinafter NRF].
 20 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Dir. 5030.50, Employment of Department of Defense Resources in Support of the United
 

States Postal Services, para. 1 (13 Apr. 1972) [hereinafter DoDD 5030.50]. 

21 Id. para. 4. (“POLICY AND RESPONSIBILITIES; 4.1. Authority. Legal authority for the employment of military
 

resources at the direction of the President to reestablish and maintain essential postal service may be found in Section
 

686 of Title 31, U.S. Code, and Section 411 of Title 39, U.S. Code.”). 

22 In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564 (1895). 

23 The Economy Act of 1932, 31 U.S.C.A. § 1535 (2006), implemented by 39 U.S.C. § 411 (Cooperation with other 

Government Agencies). 

24 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Instr. 4000.19, Interservice and Intragovernmental Support, para. 4.4 (9 Aug. 1995). 

25 10 U.S.C. §§ 12301–12304; see also DoDD 5030.50, supra note 20, para. 4.4.1.
 26 Exec. Order No. 13527, 75 Fed. Reg. 737 (Jan. 6, 2010).
 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 116 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

response system to supplement and assist state and local medical resources during disasters, is 

outlined in DoDD 6000.12, Health Services Operations and Readiness.

27 The NDMS is a joint 

partnership sponsored by DoD, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), HHS, and FEMA and it 

is activated by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs (ASD(HA)).28 Upon 

activation, DoD components “shall participate in relief operations to the extent compatible with 

U.S. national security” in response to a U.S. domestic disaster.29 

Under the National Response Framework, Emergency Support Function (ESF) Number 8, Public 

Health and Medical Services Annex,30 HHS is the primary agency.31 The Public Health Service 

(PHS), an agency of the DHS, leads this effort by directing the activation of the NDMS.32 Upon 

activation, ESF #8 is coordinated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services through the 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR).33 HHS is responsible for 

assisting with the assessment of health hazards at a response site and the health protection of both 

response workers and the general public. Support is categorized as follows: 

• Assessment of health and medical needs; 

• Health surveillance; 

• Medical personnel; 

• Health/medical/veterinary equipment and supplies; 

• Patient evacuation; 

• Patient care; 

• Safety and security of drugs, biologics, and medical devices; 

• Blood and blood products; 

• Food safety and security; 

• Agriculture safety and security; 

• All-hazard public health and medical consultation, technical assistance, and support; 

• Behavioral health care; 

• Public health and medical information; 

• Vector control; 

• Potable water/wastewater and solid waste disposal; 

• Mass fatality management, victim identification, and decontaminating remains; 

• Veterinary medical support.34 

The NDMS may be activated by the Director, FEMA, or the Assistant Secretary of Health, HHS, in 

response to a U.S. domestic disaster.35 The federal government will respond to the crisis by using 

27 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Dir. 6000.12, Health Services Operations and Readiness, para. 4.9 (April 29, 1996) 

[hereinafter DoDD 600.12]. 

28 Id. 

29 Id. 30 NRF, Emergency Support Function #8, Public Health and Medical Services Annex (January 2008) [hereinafter ESF 

#8].
 31 Id. at 8-1. 32 Id. at 8-3. 

33 Id. 34 Id. at 8-1–8-2. 

Chapter 8 

117 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

the NDMS to supplement state and local medical resources. DoD components participate to the 

extent compatible with U.S. national security. The NDMS Operations Support Center (OSC), once 

activated, responds to medical tasks from the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) at the Disaster 

Field Office (DFO). The DFO includes the Continental United States Army Defense Coordinating 

Officer, along with the regional point of contact from the PHS and the NDMS Liaison Officer. The 

NDMS OSC assigns Disaster Medical Assistance Teams (DMATs) to the disaster site to help local 

authorities with medical management of casualties. The Emergency Management Group (EMG) at 

the HHS Secretary’s Operation Center (SOC) coordinates the overall response and maintains 

constant communications with the National Operations Center (NOC).36 ESF #8 may request 

support from DoD in the form of immediate medical response capabilities. This request may 

include DoD support for casualty clearing and staging, patient treatment, and support services such 

as surveillance and laboratory diagnostics.37 Further assets that are available from the strategic 

national stockpile include: medical equipment and supplies, radiation detection equipment, 

ambulance support under the national ambulance contract, transportation support, patient care, and 

mortuary services and support.38 

5. Animal and Plant Disease Eradication 

Under ESF #8, USDA is responsible for providing the resources to control and eradicate an 

outbreak of highly contagious or economically devastating animal disease and food security.39 The 

DoD is also tasked to support this function by providing available military medical personnel for the 

protection of public health to include food and water supplies, and for the support of the medical 

treatment of animals.40 The National Guard maintains National Guard Expeditionary Medical 

Support (EMEDS) packages that can support these missions with proper authority.41 The National 

Guard also maintains the Fatality & Services Recovery Response Team (FSRT).42 

6. Mass Immigration Emergency 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is charged, in addition to other responsibilities, to 

enforce the laws of the United States dealing with immigration.43 The majority of this 

responsibility is fulfilled by the routine daily operations of the U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement (ICE)44 of DHS. When individuals enter the United States illegally, they are subject 

35 DoDD 6000.12, supra note 27, para. 4.9.
 36 ESF #8, supra note 30, at 8-2.
 37 Id. at 8-5. 38 Id. at 8-5– 8-8; see also Chart at ESF #8-11–8-12. 

39 Id. at 8-10–8-11. 40 Id. at 8-11. 

41 National Guard Bureau Regulation 500-1, National Guard Domestic Operations, para. 5-11a (13 June 2008)
 

[hereinafter NGR 500-1].
 42 Id. para. 5-11b. 

43 See Homeland Security Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002) (codified primarily at 6 U.S.C. §§
 

101-557) [hereinafter HSA 2002]. § 101(B).
 44 ICE is the investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The agency is comprised of several
 

components from the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the U.S. Customs Service, and the Federal
 

Protective Service (FPS). The agency combines the investigative, detention and removal, and intelligence functions of 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 118 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

to apprehension by law enforcement authorities. ICE then takes action to deport or resettle these 

immigrants. If the number of illegal immigrants exceeds the capacity of the ICE, the President may 

declare a Mass Immigration Emergency and DoD may be called on to provide support to ICE. 

Although not addressed in the NRP, the policies and procedures for a mass immigration emergency 

are very similar to NRP emergencies. 

DoD may be tasked to assist in initial reception, transportation, housing, and the full range of 

support services required. At no time is DoD expected to engage in law enforcement activities or in 

the processing of immigrants. FORSCOM, operating with DoD Lead Operational Authority, is 

charged by JFCOM to develop and coordinate detailed planning and execution of DoD support 

operations in the continental United States. Further, the National Guard supports domestic 

emergencies such as mass immigration emergencies in a Civil Support role while in a Title 10 

status.45 “National Guard Civil Support,” however, is conducted in a Title 32 status.46 

7. Improvised Nuclear Device Incidents 

The Nuclear/Radiological Incident Annex of the National Response Framework provides national 

policy and assigns responsibility to designated federal departments for the release of nuclear or 

radiologic materials, whether purposeful or inadvertent.47 DoD is the coordinating agency for 

incidents occurring on all DoD owned or operated facilities, and for incidents involving a nuclear 

weapon, special nuclear material, or nuclear components under DoD custody.48 In the event of a 

deliberate attack, DHS is the coordinating agency and DOJ is the lead law enforcement authority.49 

8. DoD Response to Radiological Accidents 

Radiological accidents are defined as a “loss of control over radiation or radioactive material that 

presents a hazard to life, health, or property or that may result in any member of the general 

population exceeding exposure limits for ionizing radiation.”50 These accidents are not included in 

DoDD 3025.18, Defense Support of Civil Authorities. DoDD 3150.8, DoD Response to 

Radiological Accidents, outlines DoD support for the FEMA Federal Radiological Emergency 

Response Plan (FRERP).51 The FRERP establishes an organized and integrated capability for 

timely, coordinated response by federal agencies to peacetime radiological emergencies.52 The 

Defense Nuclear Agency is assigned the lead role in coordinating plans with other federal 

the former INS with the investigative, intelligence, and air & marine functions of the former Customs Service. All the 

functions of the former FPS are also part of ICE.
 45 NGR 500-1, supra note 41, para. 4-2.d.
 46 Id. para. 4-2d(1-2). 

47 U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, Nuclear/Radiological Incident Annex, p.1 (June 2008) [hereinafter NRIA]. 

48 Id. at 8. 

49 Id. at 9. 50 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Dir. 3150.8, DoD Response to Radiological Accidents, E2.1.5 (24 Mar. 1987, certified 

current as of 8 Mar. 2003) [hereinafter DoDD 3150.8]. 

51 Id. para. 1.2.
 

52 U.S. Commander in Chief, Joint Forces Command, Functional Plan 2504-00, Response to CBRNE 

Incidents/Accidents, Annex A (TASK ORGANIZATION), para. 1a(3) (1 May 2000).
 

Chapter 8 

119 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

agencies.53 JFCOM provides assistance to an affected area in support of the LFA and under the 

overall coordination of a Senior Federal Official, such as a FCO. 

The President, through Executive Order (EO) 12241, instructed the Director of FEMA to publish a 

plan to protect public health and safety in the event of an accident at a nuclear power plant as part of 

the National Contingency Plan.54 EO 12241 is located at DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 2-1. 

Pursuant to EO 12657, FEMA is required to provide assistance in emergency preparedness planning 

at commercial nuclear power plants.55 (EO 12657 is located in the DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., 

App. 2-5.) FEMA is to ensure that plans and procedures are in place to respond to radiological 

emergencies at commercial nuclear power plants in operation. FEMA is also charged with 

coordinating the use of Veterans Affairs and military medical facilities. In the event of an accident, 

DoD may be required to provide medical and other support. 

9. DoD Support to Wildfires 

State and local governments have the primary responsibility to prevent and control wildfires.56 

DoD policy is to provide emergency assistance to federal agencies in the form of personnel, 

equipment, supplies, or fire protection service in cases where a forest or grassland fire emergency is 

beyond the capabilities of available resources.57 DoD provides support pursuant to a memorandum 

of understanding (MOU) between DoD, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the 

Department of the Interior (DOI).58 A copy of the MOU is located at DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., 

App. 8-13. 

The primary federal agency responsible for coordinating the federal response to wildfires is the 

National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC). The NIFC, located in Boise, Idaho,59 is the nation’s 

support center for wildland firefighting60 and is a joint operation of the DOI and USDA.61 Seven 

53 DoDD 3150.8, supra note 50, para. 5.1.1.
 54 Exec. Order No. 12241, 3 C.F.R. 282 (1980).
 

55 Exec. Order No. 12657, 3 C.F.R. 611 (1988).
 56 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, 3025.1-M, Manual for Civil Emergencies, ch. 1 (General) para. E.8, and ch. 3 (Disasters) 

para. B.3.a. (June 1994) [hereinafter DoD 3025.1-M]; Memorandum of Understanding Between the Department of 

Defense and the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior, III (Policy) (1975) [hereinafter MOU-USDA/DOI]; see 

also NRF, supra note 19, at Emergency Support Function #4 (Firefighting Annex), I. Introduction, para. B. (Scope), IV. 

Concept of Operations, A (General), para. 1, and C (Other Organizations); U.S. Commander in Chief, Forces 

Command, Functional Plan 2501-00, Military Support to Civil Authorities (MSCA), Annex C (operations), Appendix
 

27 (wildfire fighting plan), para. 1d(1)(U) (1 May 2000) [hereinafter COMFORSCOM Func Plan 2501-00]; Federal 

Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review, 21 (18 Dec. 1995) available at
 

http://www.nwcg.gov/branches/ppm/fpc/archives/fire_policy/mission/1995_fed_wildland_fire_policy_program_report.
 

pdf.
 57 DoDD 3025.1-M, supra note 56, ch. 3 (Disasters), para. B3a. 58 MOU-USDA/DOI, supra note 56; COMFORSCOM Func Plan 2501-00, supra note 56, App. 27, para. 1e(1).
 59 NRF, supra note 19, Emergency Support Function #4 (Firefighting Annex), II. Policies, para. B, VII. Terms and 

Definitions, para. D; see also COMFORSCOM Func Plan 2501-00, supra note 56, App. 27, para. 1c(1).
 60 DoDD 3025.1-M, supra note 56, para. B.3.a, b; MOU-USDA/DOI, supra note 56, at II. RESPONSIBILITIES, para. 

D, and IV. OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES AND FUNDING, para. A1; see also National Interagency Fire Center 

(NIFC) and Its Mission at http://www.nifc.gov/nifcmiss.html. 61 DoDD 3025.1-M, supra note 56, para. B.3.b.
 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 120 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

federal agencies operate from the NIFC and work together to coordinate and support wildland fire 

and disaster operations. These agencies are: 

• Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA); 

• Bureau of Land Management (BLM); 

• Forest Service (USFS); 

• Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); 

• National Park Service (NPS); 

• National Weather Service (NWS); and, 

• Office of Aircraft Services (OAS) 62 

The NIFC evolved from the “Boise Interagency Fire Center” which was established in 1965. The 

Boise Interagency Fire Center began from separate efforts by BLM and USFS to improve fire and 

aviation support throughout much of the Great Basin and Intermountain West.63 In early 1993, the 

name was changed to the National Interagency Fire Center to reflect a national mission. 

If a national fire situation becomes severe, the National Multi-Agency Coordinating (MAC) Group 

is activated.64 This group consists of representatives of each of the federal wildland firefighting 

agencies. Representatives from the General Services Administration, the U.S. military, and state 

forestry services may also participate. The federal and state representatives of this group are 

responsible for responding to wildland fires and other emergency events. Depending on the 

national fire situation, the MAC group helps set priorities for critical, and occasionally scarce, 

equipment, supplies, and personnel. 

The National Interagency Coordination Center (NICC) is located within the NIFC. The NICC was 

established in 1975 to provide logistical support and intelligence for wildland fires across the 

nation. However, because NICC is an “all-risk” coordination center, it also provides support in 

response to other emergencies such as floods, hurricanes, and earthquakes. The NICC coordinates 

supplies and resources across the United States and provides support to incidents in foreign 

countries. The NICC is staffed jointly by BLM and USFS.65 When activity warrants, the NICC 

operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week.66 

Subordinate to the NICC are eleven “Geographic Area Coordination Centers” (GACCs). Each 

GACC is composed of federal and state wildland fire agencies. See Figure 8-1. 

62 See NAT’L INTERAGENCY COORDINATION CTR., About Us, http://www.nifc.gov/nicc/about/about.htm (last visited 

Jun. 30, 2011) [hereinafter NICC]; see also COMFORSCOM Functional Plan 2501-00, supra note 55, App. 27, para.,
 

1c(1). 

63 See NIFC History at http://www.nifc.gov/nifcmiss.html (“‘Boise’ Interagency Fire Center” is the phrase referred to
 

MOU-USDA/DOI, supra note 56, rather than NIFC). 64 See NIFC Multi-Agency Coordinating Group at http://www.nifc.gov/nifcmiss.html. 

65 See COMFORSCOM Func Plan 2501-00, supra note 55, App. 27, para. 1c (1).
 66 See NICC Organization at http://www.nifc.gov/nifctour/nicc.html. 

Chapter 8 

121 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Figure 8-1. Map of Geographical Area Coordination Centers.67 

The NICC uses a three-tiered coordination system to respond to wildland fires.68 First, a wildland 

fire is initially managed by the local agency that has fire protection responsibility for that area.69 

Engines, ground crews, smokejumpers, helicopters with water buckets, and air tankers may all be 

used for initial suppression. Various local agencies may work together, sharing personnel and 

equipment, to fight new fires and those that escape initial action. If a wildland fire grows to the 

point where local personnel and equipment cannot contain the fire, the responsible agency contacts 

one of the eleven GACCs, which is the second tier response. The GACC will locate and dispatch 

additional firefighters and support personnel throughout the geographic area. The third tier is 

triggered when GACCs can no longer meet the requests because they are supporting multiple 

incidents, or GACCs are competing for resources. When this occurs, requests for equipment and 

supplies are referred to NIFC. See DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App.8-14, NIFC Area 

Coordination Centers. 

The NIFC can request DoD assistance in one of two ways.70 First, for wildland fires outside federal 

land (on state or private lands), state officials submit their requests for suppression assistance to the 

FEMA Regional Director or FCO. The FEMA Regional Director or FCO then requests military 

assistance. When the NIFC requires military assistance under its own authorities, it contacts the 

Director of Military Support (DOMS). Second, if the response is to an emergency under the 

Stafford Act,71 the NIFC requests military assistance from FEMA, which coordinates with DOMS. 

67 GEOGRAPHIC AREA COORDINATION CTRS, About Us, http://gacc.nifc.gov/admin/about_us/about_us.htm (last visited
 

Jun. 30, 2011). 

68 See NICC, supra note 62. 69 Id. 70 DoD 3025.1-M, supra note 56, para. B.3.a; MOU-USDA/DOI, supra note 56, III. POLICY, paras. A-B. 

71 Under the Stafford Act, an “emergency” is defined as “any occasion or instance for which, in the determination of 

the President, federal assistance is needed to supplement State and local efforts and capabilities to save lives and protect 

property and public health and safety, or to lesson or avert the threat of catastrophe in any part of the United States. The 

Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. § 5121, et seq., as amended by Public L. 

No. 106-390 (2000), § 5170 [hereinafter The Stafford Act]. 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 122 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

DOMS notifies the supported COCOM, who in turn tasks the appropriate component command or 

supporting Combatant Command. All requests for military support will then be handled by the 

command designated by the supported COCOM.72 The NIFC normally requests a specific number 

of firefighters and/or items of equipment. NIFC taskings will provide the necessary information, 

such as incident name, location, agency representation, and duration of assignment. 

Normally, as part of the efforts of state and local governments to prevent and control wildfires, the 

National Guard (NG) will respond in state active duty (SAD) status.73 For example, during the 

summer of 2000, ten states provided more than 1,500 NG Soldiers and Airmen who served in SAD 

status.74 The NG personnel provided law enforcement support for traffic control, transportation and 

aviation support, and firefighters. The Air National Guard (ANG) and Air Force Reserve (AFR) 

provided eight C-130 aircraft equipped with the modular airborne firefighting system (MAFFS). 

Additionally, federal firefighting officials at NIFC formally requested assistance from DoD. More 

than 4,600 active duty Soldiers, Marines and Airmen were committed to augment federal and local 

firefighters and law enforcement officials. NIFC instituted a “Preparedness Level 5” indicating that 

all federal firefighting resources were fully committed. 

The ANG and AFR use the USFS-owned Modular Airborne Fire Fighting System (MAFFS), when 

requested, to assist with wildland firefighting during extreme conditions.75 Congress established 

the MAFFS Program in the early 1970s as a wildland fire program, not a military program. The 

objective of the MAFFS program is to provide emergency capability to supplement the existing 

commercial air tanker support on wildfires. The NICC can activate the MAFFS when all other 

contract air tankers are committed, or are otherwise unable to meet requests for air operations. The 

request for MAFFS activation is approved by the national MAFFS liaison officer, who is the USFS 

director at NIFC. This request is then formally submitted to DOMS. Governors of states where NG 

MAFFS units are stationed may activate MAFFS missions within their state boundaries when 

covered by a memorandum of understanding with the USFS. In accordance with military 

requirements for initial qualification and recurrent training, MAFFS crews are trained every year 

with Forest Service national aviation operations personnel. 

72 DoD 3025.1-M, supra note 56, para. B.3.d.
 73 This is distinguished from Title 32 and Title 10 status for NG personnel. See infra Chapter 10, Reserve Components. 74 See DoD News Release, More Troops Tabbed to Battle Montana Wildfires, Aug. 23, 2000, 

http://osd.dtic.mil/news/Aug2000/n08232000_20008231.html (last visited Jun. 30, 2011).
 75 DoD 3025.1-M, supra note 56, ch. 3 (Disasters), para. B.3.f.; see also Modular Airborne Fire Fighting System
 

(MAFFS) Fact Sheet at http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/aviation/fixed_wing/maffs/index.html (last visited Jun. 30, 2011). A 

MAFFS is a self-contained and pressurized, reusable 3,000 gallon aerial fluid dispersal system that allows Lockheed C130 cargo/utility aircraft to be converted to wildland firefighting air tankers without structural modification to the 

aircraft. The 3,000 gallons of retardant are discharged in about five seconds through two tubes exiting the rear ramp of 

the plane. Most MAFFS are “single-shot” systems, meaning the full load is discharged at one time. One load may lay 

down a “line” about one-quarter-mile-long and sixty feet wide. The units are loaded with either water or retardant—a 

chemical that inhibits the combustion potential of vegetation on the ground. This allows firefighters on the ground to 

rapidly take advantage of the retardant effect, which helps in line-building efforts. The retardant’s bright red or fuchsia 

color helps pilots observe the accuracy of their drops on the edge of the fire.
 

Chapter 8 

123 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

There are currently eight MAFFS units in the system. Two are positioned at each of the following 

Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve locations: 

• 153rd Airlift Wing (AW), Cheyenne, WY (ANG); 

• 146th AW, Port Hueneme, CA (ANG); 

• 145th AW, Charlotte, NC (ANG); and, 

• 302nd AW, Peterson AFB, Colorado Springs, CO (AFR) 

The mobilization of MAAFS resources requires a pre-deployment analysis. Prior to deployment of 

these assets, local foresters are responsible for ensuring that regional, commercially-available assets 

are unavailable or already committed to a mission. Similarly, if assets are sought by the NICC, 

commercial assets must be unavailable at the national level. Payments are governed by the 

appropriate Memorandum of Understanding–Collection Agreements. These agreements are among 

the military authority and the Forestry Service.76 

C. Environmental Missions 

The military services and DoD carry out an environmental program focused on DoD facilities. 

However, DoD may also be called upon to provide environmental assistance during an emergency 

or for domestic contingency operations involving a major federal response to an environmental 

disaster. The military is a member of the national and regional response teams responsible for 

preparing for and responding to hazardous substance spills under the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Contingency Plan (the NCP).77 

The NCP is the federal government’s plan for emergency response to discharge of oil into the 

navigable waters of the United States and to releases of chemicals into the environment. The NCP 

was developed to ensure that the resources and expertise of the federal government would be 

immediately available for those oil and hazardous substance incidents requiring national or regional 

response. 

Under the NRF, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has primary responsibility for ESF10, Hazardous Materials.78 DOMS coordinates the DoD response in support of FEMA and the 

NCP.79 The scope of operations includes detection, identification, containment, and cleanup or 

disposal of released hazardous materials. Other operations under ESF-10 include actions such as 

household hazardous waste collection, permitting and monitoring of debris disposal, water and air 

quality monitoring and protection, and protection of natural resources. 

Executive Order 12580 directs the NCP to provide for a National Response Team (NRT) for 

national planning and coordination of preparedness and response actions. The NRT is composed of 

76 See U.S. FIRE AND AVIATION MGMT., Modular Airborne Firefighting System, 

http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/aviation/fixed_wing/maffs/system.html (last visited Jun. 30, 2011). 77 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 9601-9675 (2006); The 

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, 40 C.F.R. § 300, et. seq. (1997) [hereinafter NCP]. 

78 NRF, supra note 19, Emergency Support Function #10, Hazardous Materials Annex. 

79 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Dir. 5030.41, Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Prevention and Contingency Program
 

(1 June 1977, C1, 26 Sept. 1978) [hereinafter DoDD 5030.41]. 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 124 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

representatives of appropriate federal departments and agencies, including DoD.80 See DOPLAW 

Handbook, Supp., App. 2-3, EO 12580. Regional response teams (RRTs), the regional counterpart 

to the NRT, plan and coordinate regional preparedness and response actions. EPA chairs the 

standing NRT. 

The NRF ESF #10 Hazardous Materials Annex, Relation to Existing Response under the NCP, the 

National Response System, and the National and Regional Response Teams, sets forth the tiered 

levels and responsibilities for response.81 DoD provides expertise through the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Navy. DoD provides the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) 

for all hazardous substance releases, except oil spills, that originate from DoD facilities or vessels.82 

The Regional Response Teams (RRTs) provide regional planning and preparation before a pollution 

incident as well as coordination and advice after an incident occurs.83 The two principal 

components of the RRT are the Standing RRT and the Incident Specific RRT. The Standing RRT is 

comprised of all the departments and agencies of the NRT plus the involved states, and is cochaired by EPA and the Coast Guard. The USACE is the principal agency for the Army’s 

environmental response and appoints Army representatives to the RRT. The Incident Specific RRT 

is comprised of RRT members who have specific expertise or equipment that could assist the FOSC 

in responding to an incident. Either EPA or the Coast Guard chairs the incident specific RRT, 

depending on the location of the spill.84 

The operational level of environmental response management is performed by the FOSC. The 

FOSC ensures a timely, effective response is conducted which minimizes damage to the 

environment. The FOSC and either EPA, for inland areas, or the USCG, for coastal areas, are the 

principal participants for federal response actions. DoD and the Department of Energy provide the 

FOSC when there is a hazardous release from their facilities or vessels, and respond to their own 

authorities. The FOSC coordinates all federal containment, removal, and disposal efforts, and 

federal resources. The FOSC is also the point of contact for the coordination of federal efforts with 

those of the local response community.85 

1. The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill 

Major environmental contingency operations within the United States may be handled exclusively 

under the NCP without a Presidential declaration of a major disaster under the Stafford Act. During 

the Deepwater Horizon crisis in 2010, there was substantial confusion in the public and in press 

reports regarding the applicability of the Stafford Act to response operations. There was never a 

Stafford Act declaration during the Deepwater Horizon response. 

80 Exec. Order No. 12,580, 3 C.F.R. 193 (1987); see also DoDD 5030.41, supra note 79, para. 5.4. 81 NRF, supra note 19, ESF# 10, Relation to Existing Response under the NCP, the National Response System, and the 

National and Regional Response Teams. 

82 NCP, supra note 77, § 30.5, Definition.
 83 NRF, supra note 19, ESF# 10. 

84 Id. 85 NAT’L RESPONSE CTR., National Response System, http://www.nrc.uscg.mil/nrsinfo.html (last visited Jun. 30, 2011). 

Chapter 8 

125 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Despite the magnitude of that emergency, all operations were conducted under the President’s 

delegable authorities under the Clean Water Act86 and the NCP. Those authorities specifically 

provide mechanisms by which the “Responsible Parties” for the discharge87 directly pay all removal 

costs and certain damages arising from the discharge.88 Consequently, a Stafford Act declaration 

was not necessary during Deepwater Horizon because the primary responsible party, BP, directly 

funded all removal costs. The National Incident Commander,89 Admiral Thad Allen, U.S. Coast 

Guard, and the FOSC (a position occupied during 2010 by several Coast Guard flag and seniorlevel officers) coordinated the response and directed BP’s activities in close coordination with state 

and local leaders. 

However, if other events caused or exacerbated damage to the Gulf Coast during the Deepwater 

Horizon clean-up efforts, e.g., a hurricane or similar event, a Stafford Act response may have been 

directed for those contingencies in addition to the environmental response already ongoing pursuant 

to the Clean Water Act and the NCP. In such a scenario, all response activities would have been 

jointly coordinated from a Unified Command. 

D. Missions in Support of Law Enforcement 

1. Support of United States Secret Service 

DoDD 3025.13, Employment of Department of Defense Resources in Support of the United States 

Secret Service, provides for reimbursable support of the Secret Service and identifies 

reimbursement accounting procedures.90 Requests for assistance go through the White House 

Military Office or DoD Executive Secretary.91 

2. Imagery Intelligence and Geospatial Support 

The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) has a mission to support domestic operations 

through the use of its organic assets. DCID 1/8 provides that NGA will use its products “from 

national satellite and airborne reconnaissance systems . . . in support of [f]ederal departments and 

agencies.”92 Although the use of intelligence assets are subject to extensive regulation (see chapter 

9), this capability provides appropriate federal agencies access to real-time and near real-time 

imagery and geospatial support. 

86 33 U.S.C. §1321(c). 

87 Among the Responsible Parties in DEEPWATER HORIZON were BP (formed after the merger of British Petroleum 

and Amoco in 2001) and Transocean. 

88 33 U.S.C. § 2702(a). In oil discharge situations, the federal government may use the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to 

pay costs related to oil spill removal activities. Responsible Parties reimburse the fund for these costs. The statute 

recognizes that reimbursement may not be available when a Responsible Party is insolvent or cannot be identified. 

89 40 C.F.R. § 300.323(c) provides that a National Incident Commander (NIC) may be appointed for a “Spill of 

National Significance.” The NIC assumes the role of the FOSC in communicating with effected parties and the public 

and coordinating federal, state, local and international resources at the national level. 

90 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.13, EMPLOYMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RESOURCES IN SUPPORT OF THE 

UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, PARAS. 3.1, 3.2 (13 Sept. 1985). 

91 Id. para. 3.4.2. 

92 DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE DIRECTIVE (DCID)1/8 – MANAGEMENT OF NATIONAL IMAGERY, IMAGERY 

INTELLIGENCE, GEOSPATIAL (21 March 2001), D.2b.ii. See also U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5105.60, NATIONAL 

GEOSPATIAL-INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, PARAS. 6.(a).(6).(b) (29 July 2009). 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 126 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Intelligence activities in the United States are governed broadly by Executive Order 12333. EO 

12333 prohibits directed collection on U.S. persons through the use of overhead reconnaissance by 

intelligence agencies.93 EO 12333, however, grants broad authority to U.S. intelligence agencies to 

provide direct support to other federal agencies. This support can be extended to local law 

enforcement in circumstances where lives are at risk.94 Such support, however, requires approval 

of the General Counsel of the Supporting Agency. 

The NGA under its various authorities provides imagery and geospatial support in a variety of 

domestic support operations. These operations include homeland security, civil support, and 

support to law enforcement missions. NGA’s support to homeland security includes support to 

special events (see chapter 7) and to exercises in support of homeland security training. NGA 

provides civil support in natural disasters and in other agency and DoD missions to include 

vulnerability studies. Support to law enforcement can include the use of imagery to provide 

situational awareness or other forms of assistance. 

3. Critical Asset Assurance Program 

EO 12656 requires that every federal department and agency identify and develop plans to protect 

facilities and resources essential to the nation’s defense and welfare in order to minimize 

disruptions of essential services during national security emergencies. Security emergencies may 

result from natural disasters, military attack, or any other event that seriously degrades the security 

of the United States.95 

4. Continuity of Operations Policies and Planning 

EO 12656 requires heads of federal agencies to ensure the continuity of essential functions during a 

national security emergency.96 DoDD 3020.26, Continuity of Operations Policy and Planning, 

implements EO 12656 by tasking all DoD components to prepare plans for the continuity of 

operations and of government during an emergency.97 (See DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 2-4, 

EO 12656, Emergency Preparedness. See also Appendix 8-16, PDD-NSC-67. DoDD 3020.36, 

Assignment of National Security Emergency Preparedness (NSEP) Responsibilities to DoD 

Components, overlaps DoDD 3020.26. Under DoDD 3020.36, each DoD component shares the 

general responsibilities for emergency preparedness, mobilization planning, and crisis management 

in ensuring the continuity of government in any national security or domestic emergency 

situation.98 DoDD 3020.36 also requires the identification of alternate headquarters, emergency 

relocation sites, and other permanent facilities to be used during emergencies.99 

93 See Exec. Order No. 12333, 3 C.F.R. 200 (1982), reprinted in 50 U.S.C. § 401.
 94 Id. at para. 2.6(c).
 95 EO 12656, supra note 3, sec.204.
 

96 EO 12656, supra note 3, sec.202.
 97 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3020.26, CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS POLICY AND PLANNING, para. 4.1 (Oct. 1988). 

98 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3020.36, ASSIGNMENT OF NATIONAL SECURITY EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS (NSEP) 

RESPONSIBILITIES TO DOD COMPONENTS, PARA. 4.2 (2 Nov. 1988). 99 Id. 

Chapter 8 

127 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

5. Explosive Ordnance Disposal 

DoDD 5160.62, Single Manager Responsibility for Military Explosive Ordnance Disposal 

Technology and Training, establishes the Navy as the single agency for service support of the nonnuclear explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) program.100 Army Regulation 75-14/OPNAVINST 

8027.1E/ARF 136-8/MCO 8027.1B, Interservice Responsibilities for Explosive Ordnance Disposal, 

delineates EOD areas of responsibilities for the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force.101 

The EOD mission within the Department of the Army is defined in AR 75-15, Responsibilities and 

Procedures for Explosive Ordnance. The mission includes providing “assistance to public safety 

and law enforcement agencies” and conducting “explosive ordnance disposal ‘bomb and sabotage’ 

training for civil preparedness, law enforcement, fire protection[,] and other public officials.”102 It 

also includes providing “explosive ordnance disposal support to the Departments of Energy and 

Justice in the neutralization of improvised nuclear devices in accordance with current agreements 

and directives.”103 The Army should primarily provide training or advice, rather than physical 

assistance. AR 75-15 provides: 

The Department of the Army is not responsible for responding to, or disposing of, 

nonmilitary commercial-type explosives, chemicals, or dangerous articles in the 

possession of, or controlled by commercial concerns or civilian agencies. Assistance 

may be provided, when requested by federal agencies or civil authorities, in the 

interest of preserving public safety. Where a delay in responding to a request for 

assistance from other activities would endanger life or cause injury, commanders 

may authorize assistance to that extent necessary, to prevent injury or death. EOD 

personnel may act as technical consultants or advisors, or they may render safety and 

disposal procedures if requested. 

Thus, EOD forces should only provide physical assistance when the explosive is a DoD munitions 

or when necessary under immediate response authority to save lives. 

E. Community Assistance 

The most frequently conducted domestic support operations involve community assistance. These 

missions include public works, education, training, minor construction projects, and providing color 

guards for local events. Intended to address unmet needs, they should avoid duplication or 

competition with the civilian sector. Activities vary widely, ranging from individual Soldier 

100 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 75-15, RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE, para. 1-7 (22 

Feb. 2005). AR 75-15 does not apply to the Army Reserves or Army National Guard. 

101 Id. paras. 1-1, 2-1. The Army has EOD responsibility on Army installations and on landmass areas not specifically 

assigned as the responsibility of the Navy, Marine Corps, or the Air Force. The Department of the Navy is responsible 

for: EOD activities on Navy installations; explosive ordnance in the physical possession of the Navy; in assigned 

operational areas; within the oceans and contiguous waters, up to the high water mark of sea coasts, inlets, bays, 

harbors, and rivers; in any rivers, canals or enclosed bodies of water; and for the rendering safe and disposal of 

underwater explosive ordnance. The Department of the Air Force and the Marine Corps have EOD responsibility on 

their own installations, for explosive ordnance in their physical possession, and in assigned operational areas. 

102 Id. para. 1-4. 103 Id. 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 128 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

involvement to full Army participation, and are characterized by detailed coordination between the 

military command and community authorities. 

1. National Guard Assistance for Certain Youth and Charitable Organizations 

National Guard (NG) members and units, in conjunction with required military training,104 may 

provide services to certain eligible youth and charitable organizations.105 The eligible organizations 

are: 

• Boy and Girl Scouts of America; 

• Boys and Girls Clubs of America; 

• Young Men’s and Young Women’s Christian Associations (YMCA/YWCA); 

• Civil Air Patrol; 

• U.S. Olympic Committee; 

• Special Olympics; 

• Campfire Boys and Girls; 

• 4-H Clubs; and 

• Police Athletic Leagues.106 

The Secretary of Defense is authorized to designate other youth or charitable organizations for 

support. Authorized services include ground transportation, administrative support, technical 

training, emergency medical assistance, and communications services. The Special Olympics are 

specifically authorized air transportation.107 

In providing authorized services, NG facilities and equipment including vehicles leased to the NG 

and the DoD may be used.108 As with other types of domestic support operations, the provision of 

services must not adversely affect the quality of NG training or otherwise interfere with the member 

or unit’s ability to perform military functions. Further, training costs should not significantly 

increase, and NG personnel should enhance their military skills as a result of their participation. 

Lastly, the requested services must not be commercially available. If available commercially, the 

commercial entity affected can waive this requirement in writing.109 

2. Support and Services for Eligible Organizations and Activities Outside DoD 

The military departments are also authorized to provide services and support to certain non-DoD 

eligible organizations.110 See Chapter 7, Military Support to Special Events for a discussion of the 

relevant authorities. 

104 32 U.S.C. § 502. 105 Id. § 508. 106 Id. § 508(d). 107 Id. § 508(b). 108 Id. § 508(c). 

109 Id. § 508(a). 110 10 U.S.C. § 2012(a). 

Chapter 8 

129 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

3. National Guard Civilian Youth Opportunities Program 

The SECDEF, acting through the Chief, National Guard Bureau, conducts a National Guard civilian 

youth opportunities program, known as the “National Guard Challenge Program.”111 Intended to 

improve the life skills and employment potential of civilian youth, the Challenge Program is a youth 

program directed at helping children attain a high school diploma, providing job training and 

placement, improving personal and social skills, and providing health and hygiene education and 

physical training.112 Soldiers work with civilian leaders to provide a comprehensive support 

package ranging from choosing appropriate clothing to attending residential training facilities. 

The Challenge Program uses National Guard personnel to provide military-based training, including 

supervised work experience in community service and conservation projects, to civilian youth who 

have not graduated from a secondary school.113 To carry out the Program, the SECDEF enters into 

an agreement with a state governor or, in the case of the District of Columbia, with the commanding 

general of the District of Columbia National Guard.114 Usually, the governor will delegate the 

establishment, organization and administration of the Program to the state Adjutant General (TAG). 

The Challenge Program is not cost-free.115 Beginning in 2001, a state must now provide at least 40 

percent of the annual Challenge Program operating costs. National Guard equipment and facilities, 

including U.S. military property issued to the Guard, may be used in carrying out the Challenge 

Program.116 A state may supplement its cost-share out of other resources, including gifts. It is also 

permissible for the Program to accept, use, and dispose of gifts or donations of money, other 

property, or services.117 

Individuals selected for training in the NG Challenge Program may receive the following benefits: 

allowances for travel, personal and other expenses; quarters; subsistence; transportation; equipment; 

clothing; recreational services and supplies; and, a temporary stipend upon the successful 

completion of the training (GS-2 minimum rate of pay under 5 U.S.C. § 5332).118 A person 

receiving training under the Challenge Program is considered a U.S. employee for the purposes of 

Title 5 (relating to compensation of Federal employees for work injuries) and Title 28, and any 

other provision of law, relating to federal liability for tortious conduct of employees.119 

4. Additional Assistance Programs 

Field Manual 100-19 authorizes Army involvement in a wide variety of national assistance 

programs focusing on economic and social issues,120 For example, Army involvement can be found 

111 32 U.S.C. § 509. 112 Id. § 509(a). 113 Id. § 509(g). 114 Id. § 509(c). 115 Id. § 509(d). 116 Id. § 509(h). 117 Id. § 509(j). 118 Id. § 509(g). 

119 Id. § 509(h). 120 See FM 3-07, supra note 1, ch. 8. 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 130 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

in the Civilian Community Corps, the Drug Demand Reduction Program, the Science and 

Technology Academies Reinforcing Basic Aviation and Space Exploration (STARBASE) program, 

the Youth Physical Fitness Clinic Program, and the Medical Readiness Program.121 

F. Pandemic Influenza 

In response to growing concerns about the potential for an H5N1 pandemic, the Homeland Security 

Council issued the National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza during November 2005.122 Although 

H5N1 has not emerged as a pandemic, the World Health Organization declared on 11 June 2009 

that the H1N1 influenza had become a pandemic.123 This was followed by statements by the 

Secretaries of HLS and HHS indicating that the United States had already activated their pandemic 

response plans in anticipation of such a declaration.124 Although easily transmissible, the H1N1 

influenza has not shown a high mortality rate. Nonetheless, leaders and planners are concerned that 

a more virulent and deadly strain could present itself in the future. Accordingly, judge advocates 

advising commanders need to be prepared to confront the myriad of legal challenges that a 

pandemic could bring. This section provides an overview of the support DoD anticipates providing 

in the event of a severe pandemic. 

The DoD issued the Department of Defense Implementation Plan for Pandemic Influenza during 

August 2006.125 This “Implementation Plan” includes several planning assumptions that trigger 

scenarios of interest to the domestic operational lawyer. These assumptions include: 

•	 There will be interagency requests for assistance with mortuary affairs (MA); 

•	 The spread of H1N1 will start from multiple points of entry in the United States and spread 

rapidly throughout the Nation; 

•	 State, tribal, and local governments will not be able to ensure the provision of essential 

commodities and services; 

•	 Interstate transportation will be restricted to contain the spread of the virus; 

•	 The security of critical infrastructure will require “Federal augmentation;” 

•	 Both military and civilian MTFs will be overwhelmed; 

•	 Under existing agreements, DoD will provide support to local communities medical efforts to 

include the provisioning of personnel, supplies, and materiel; 

•	 DoD will support civil authorities consistent with applicable authorities; 

•	 DoD will support and perhaps staff key aspects of the National Critical Infrastructure; and, 

•	 U.S. Army Reserve forces will be mobilized.126 

121	 Id. 122 Homeland Security Council, National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza (November 2005). 123 The end of this 2009 Pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) International Health 

Regulations Emergency Committee on 10 August 2010. See http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/, last visited 12 June 2011. 124 CTRS. FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, Statements by HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and DHS 

Secretary Janet Napolitano on WHO Decision to Declare H1N1 Virus Outbreak a Pandemic, 

http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/statement061109.htm (last visited Jul. 5, 2011). 125 ASD, HD, MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARIES OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS, Subject: Department of Defense 

Implementation Plan for Pandemic Influenza (12 September 2006) [hereinafter “Implementation Plan”]. 126	 Id. at 8–9. 

Chapter 8 

131 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Based upon these and other assumptions, the Implementation Plan outlines nineteen planning 

categories informed by the Homeland Security Council’s (HSC) five planning priorities and thirteen 

priority areas. DoD support in the following fifteen categories will require legal analysis prior to 

execution: 

•	 Category 1: Intelligence; 

•	 Category 2: Force Protection; 

•	 Category 4: Interagency Planning Support; 

•	 Category 5: Surge Medical Capability to Assist Civil Authorities; 

•	 Category 7: Patient Transport and Strategic Airlift; 

•	 Category 8: Installation Support to Civilian Agencies; 

•	 Category 10: Security in Support of Pharmaceutical/Vaccine Production (Critical Infrastructure 

Protection (CIP)); 

•	 Category 11: Security in Support of Pharmaceutical/Vaccine Distribution; 

•	 Category 12: Communications support to Civil Authorities; 

•	 Category 13: Quarantine Assistance to U.S. Authorities; 

•	 Category 14: Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances; 

•	 Category 15: Military Assurance: Defense Industrial Base; 

•	 Category 16: Mortuary Affairs; 

•	 Category 17: Continuity of Operations & Continuity of Government; and, 

•	 Category 19: Public Affairs support to Civil Authorities.127 

This Handbook provides an overview of many of the authorities necessary to support the abovereferenced categories. However, if a H1N1 pandemic evolves into one characterized by both high 

mortality and strike rates, the magnitude of the support requested from DoD may challenge existing 

authorities and resources. 

The Congressional Research Service has also developed a CRS Report for Congress that outlines 

key legal issues raised by Pandemic Influenza outbreak.128 The authors note that the federal 

authorities authorizing federal support for a pandemic influenza contingency include the Public 

Health Service Act and the Stafford Act. These authorities involve the establishment of quarantines 

and isolation facilities at borders or of an interstate nature.129 As discussed above, DoD planning 

guidance directs consideration be given to the potential for DoD to provide quarantine support to 

U.S. authorities.130 This would be in support of HHS’s authority “to prevent the introduction, 

transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or 

possessions, or from one State or possession into any other State or possession.”131 These foreign 

and interstate quarantine authorities are administered by the Director of the CDC and executed as 

necessary by the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine.132 Further, DHS provides support 

127	 Id. at 10–11. 128 KATHLEEN S. SWENDIMAN & NANCY LEE JONES, The 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) Outbreak: Selected Legal Issues, 

CRS REP’T TO CONG. (May 4, 2009) [hereinafter “CRS REP’T”]. 

129	 Id. summary. 

130 See Implementation Plan, supra note 125, at 11, Category 13. 131 42 U.S.C. 264(a). 

132	 See CRS REP’T, supra note 128 at 6–7. 

Chapter 8 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 132 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

to the CDC through three of its agencies: U.S. Customs & Border Protection; U.S. Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement; and, the United States Coast Guard.133 

This authority provided to DoD will be secondary to the States which have primary quarantine and 

isolation authorities under state law.134 However, upon request, or upon the determination that local 

efforts are inadequate, the federal government may assume primary responsibility for such 

activity.135 To the extent that state and local efforts prove ineffective, the likelihood of federal 

intervention and a corresponding request for support to the DoD increases. Request for support 

could be necessary in some cases because of outdated state laws136 that do not reflect a modern 

understanding of disease and could hamper stated efforts to contain outbreaks.137 Such requested 

support may prove unpopular. Further, the situation in affected areas may trigger broad requests or 

directions of DoD support to other federal or non-federal entities.138 Such support could also 

involve the detailing of military law enforcement personnel to augment civilian federal law 

enforcement pursuant to the Emergency Federal Law Enforcement Assistance Act (EFLEAA).139 

Such detailing is viewed by DOJ as removing the military law enforcement personnel from the 

control of the armed forces and therefore outside of the restrictions found in the PCA.140 

Although the WHO declared an H1N1 Pandemic in 2009, this did not translate in and of itself into 

support from DoD. DoD has established a Pandemic Influenza Watchboard that tracks the DoD 

Phases from 0 to 5. These phases are part of the DoD Global CONPLAN to synchronize DoD’s 

response to a pandemic influenza.141 The Secretary of Defense considers several factors in 

decisions to change the DoD Pandemic Phase. These are: operational; efficiency of virus 

transmission; and, geographic distribution. This multifaceted approach differs from the 

methodology used by the WHO which focuses primarily upon the efficiency of transmission. For 

example, on 1 October 2009 the WHO Phase was level 6 while the DoD Phase was 0.142 Consistent 

with the operational focus of the DoD phasing, a DoD Phase 4 Pandemic occurs when there is 

“receipt of information that a highly lethal pandemic influenza virus is spreading globally from 

human to human, signaling a breach in containment and failing interdiction efforts.”143 In contrast, 

the WHO Pandemic Phase 6 does not focus upon lethality and related impacts, but the efficiency of 

the influenza’s transmission among humans. 

133 Id. at 7. 

134 Id. 135 See id. at 8, n.41; see also 42 U.S.C. § 264(c); 42 C.F.R. 70.2. 136 For a survey of state quarantine and isolation authorities, see NAT’L CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES, State 

Quarantine and Isolation Studies, http://www.ncsl.org/?TabId=17104 (last visited Jul. 5, 2011). 137 KATHLEEN S. SWENDIMAN & JENNIFER K. ELSEA, Federal and State Quarantine and Isolation Authority, CRS 

REP’T TO CONG. at CRS-9 (August 16, 2006) [hereinafter “CRS QUARANTINE REP’T”].
 

138 See Implementation Plan, supra note 125 at 10–11, Categories 1, 2, 4–5, 7–8, 10–17 & 19. 

139 42 U.S.C. § 10501 et seq. 140 OAG Memorandum for the President, Summary of Legal Authorities for use in Response to an Outbreak of 

Pandemic Influenza (April 25, 2009), at Attachment Page 4.
 141 See DEP’T OF DEF., Pandemic Influenza Watchboard, http://fhp.osd.mil/aiWatchboard/pandemicflu.jsp (last visited
 

Jul. 5, 2011). 

142 Id. 143 Id. 

Chapter 8 

133 Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Chapter 8
 

Miscellaneous Domestic Support Operations 134
 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 9 

INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT AND INFORMATION HANDLING 

DURING DOMESTIC AND DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 National Security Act of 1947 (as amended), 50 U.S.C. § 401 et seq. 

•	 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (as amended), 50 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq. 

•	 Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-458 [S. 2845], 

December 17, 2004. 

•	 The Immigration and Nationality Act (as amended), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq. 

•	 EO 12333 - U.S. Intelligence Activities, as amended, December 4, 1981. 

•	 EO 13526, Classified National Security Information, December 23, 2009. 

•	 DoDI 5210.52 - Security Classification of Airborne Sensor Imagery and Imaging Systems, May 

18, 1989. 

•	 DoDD 5143.01, Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence (USD(I)), November 23, 2005. 

•	 DoDD 5240.1 - DoD Intelligence Activities, August 27, 2007. 

•	 DoD 5240.1-R - Procedures Governing the Activities of DoD Intelligence Components That 

Affect U.S. Persons, December, 1982. 

•	 Defense Intelligence Agency Regulation (DIAR) 50-30 - Security Classification of Airborne 

Sensor Imagery, June 25, 1997. 

•	 Agreement Governing the Conduct of Defense Department Counterintelligence Activities in 

Conjunction with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, (FOUO) April 5, 1979. 

•	 Supplement to 1979 FBI/DoD Memorandum of Understanding: Coordination of 

Counterintelligence Matters Between the FBI and DoD, (S) June 20, 1996. 

•	 Joint Publications Intelligence series 2-0 

•	 AFPD 14-1 - ISR Planning, Resources, and Operations, April 2, 2004. 

•	 AFI 14-104 - Oversight of Intelligence Activities, April 14, 2005. 

•	 AFI 14 series on Intelligence. 

•	 AR 381-10 - Army Intelligence Activities, May 3, 2007. 

•	 AR 381-20 - The Army Counterintelligence Program, November 15, 1993. 

•	 AR 381-xx series on Intelligence. 

•	 SECNAVINST 3820.3E - Oversight of Intelligence Activities Within the Dep’t of the Navy, 

September 21, 2005. 

•	 SECNAVINST 3850.2C - Dep’t of the Navy Counterintelligence, July 21, 2005. 

•	 Marine Corps Warfighting Pub 2-1 - Intelligence Operations, September 10, 2003. 

•	 Marine Corps Warfighting Pub 2-14 - Counterintelligence, July 13, 2004. 

•	 Marine Corps Warfighting Pub 2-x series on Intelligence. 

•	 National Guard Joint Force Headquarters State J2 Incident Awareness and Assessment 

Handbook, February 27, 2009. 

KEY REFERENCES FOR INFORMATION HANDLING: 

•	 5 U.S.C. § 552a - The Privacy Act (as amended) 

•	 DoDD 5400.11-R - DoD Privacy Program, May 17, 2007. 

•	 DoDD 5200.27 - Acquisition of Information Concerning Persons and Organizations not 

Affiliated with the Department of Defense, January 7, 1980. 

Chapter 9 

135 Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

A. Introduction 

With the ever-increasing number of domestic military missions conducted in the homeland, there 

has been a concurrent search for appropriate assets and capabilities to best perform those missions. 

Domestic missions are no different than overseas missions in that a key requirement for mission 

success is situational awareness—the commander must be aware of the situation on the ground and 

have a complete picture of the “battle space” within which the unit is operating. Overseas, 

intelligence assets normally provide such a picture. How, then, can these same assets be used in the 

homeland to support DoD missions while at the same time complying with applicable U.S. laws and 

policies? The judge advocate’s role is especially important during domestic operations utilizing 

intelligence assets and components. Judge advocates must recognize that collecting domestic 

intelligence by necessity entails collecting information on U.S. persons. Therefore, the rules 

regarding intelligence collection in the United States must comply with constitutional protections 

against unlawful search and seizure. As a result, policies and procedures for collection of 

intelligence in the United States require careful application to ensure protection of the rights of U.S. 

persons. 

As noted above, military commanders’ need for information and intelligence within the homeland is 

on the rise—they expect force protection information and intelligence to be integrated into domestic 

operations due to a heightened awareness of potential terrorist threats. These needs and 

expectations pose unique issues in the information and intelligence-gathering arena. This chapter 

provides a broad overview of collecting information on U.S. persons. If you are addressing an issue 

of collecting information in the homeland, you should seek out expertise to assist you in this 

complicated area. 

Before discussing the details of collecting information or intelligence on U.S. persons, it is 

important to understand first that there are two distinct groups of people that collect information in 

the homeland. 

•	 The first group is DoD intelligence components, as defined in EO 12333. In simple terms these 

are the Title 10 intelligence specialists—J2s, G2s, A2s, etc. This group of people—and the 

assets they use—are subject to one set of rules referred to as intelligence oversight.1

 (Title 32 

National Guard intelligence specialists—though not technically members of the intelligence 

community—follow National Guard policies concerning intelligence oversight.) 

•	 The second group of people is everyone else in DoD, including various security and police 

forces. This group is subject to a different set of rules governed by DoDD 5200.27. 

Therefore, the commander must direct his need for information or intelligence to the right 

component—the component with the capability and authority to achieve the commander’s intent. 

Intelligence is the domain of the DoD intelligence component; information comes from nonintelligence DoD components. Figuring out the nature of the data and the right unit to gather it are 

areas that often require judge advocate input. Therefore you must ensure that the very first question 

you ask when discussing collection in the homeland is “who is doing the collecting? Intelligence 

1 See U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 381-10 ARMY INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (3 May 2007) [hereinafter AR 381-10]. 

Chapter 9 

Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 136 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

assets or non-intelligence assets?” Once you answer this question, you will know what rules to 

apply. 

Section B of the chapter examines the proper use of DoD intelligence components during domestic 

support operations. Section C examines collection of information on U.S. persons by DoD nonintelligence components. Section D briefly addresses the policies and restrictions applicable to the 

National Guard when collecting information on U.S. persons during domestic operations. 

B. The Role of DoD Intelligence Components in Domestic Support Operations 

DoD intelligence components2

 are governed by four primary references. The National Security Act 

of 1947 establishes a comprehensive program for national security and defines the roles and 

missions of the intelligence community and accountability for intelligence activities. Executive 

Order (EO) 12333, United States Intelligence Activities, lays out the goals and direction of the 

national intelligence effort, and describes the roles and responsibilities of the different elements of 

the U.S. intelligence community.3

 Presently, DoD Directive (DoDD) 5240.1, DoD Intelligence 

Activities4

 and DoD Regulation 5240.1-R5 implement the guidance contained in EO 12333—as it 

pertains to DoD. Finally, each Service has its own regulation and policy guidance. 

2

 DoD intelligence components are defined in DoD 5240.1 as are all DoD Components conducting intelligence 

activities (defined as foreign intelligence or counterintelligence), including the following: 

a. The National Security Agency/Central Security Service (NSA/CSS). 

b.	 The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). 

c. The offices within the Department of Defense for the collection of specialized national foreign 

intelligence through reconnaissance programs. 

d.	 The Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence (ODCSINT), U.S. Army. 

e. The Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI). 

f. The Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (OACSI), U.S. Air Force. 

g.	 Intelligence Division, U.S. Marine Corps. 

h.	 The Army Intelligence and Security Command (USAINSCOM). 

i. The Naval Intelligence Command (NIC). [No longer in existence] 

j. The Naval Security Group Command (NSGC). 

k.	 The Air Force Intelligence Agency (AFIA). 

l. The Electronic Security Command (ESC), U.S. Air Force. 

m.	 The counterintelligence elements of the Naval Security and Investigative Command (NSIC). 

[Now called the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS)] 

n.	 The counterintelligence elements of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI). 

o.	 The 650th Military Intelligence Group, Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE). 

p.	 Other intelligence and counterintelligence organizations, staffs, and offices, or elements thereof, 

when used for foreign intelligence or counterintelligence purposes. The heads of such 

organizations, staffs, and offices, or elements thereof, shall, however, not be considered as heads 

of the DoD intelligence components for purposes of this Directive. 3 Id. 4

 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5240.1, DOD INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES (25 Apr. 1988) [hereinafter DoDD 5240.1]. 

5

 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, REG. 5240.1-R, PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE ACTIVITIES OF DOD INTELLIGENCE 

COMPONENTS THAT AFFECT U.S. PERSONS (Dec. 1982) [hereinafter DoD 5240.1-R]. As of July 2011, DoD 5240.1-R is 

undergoing major revisions; thus, practitioners citing DoD 5240.1-R must ensure that the 1982 regulation is in effect. 

Chapter 9 

137 Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

These authorities establish the operational parameters and restrictions under which DoD intelligence 

components may conduct “intelligence activities,” defined in 5240.01 as “the collection, analysis, 

production, and dissemination of foreign intelligence and counterintelligence pursuant to [DoDD 

5143.01 and EO 12333].” Therefore intelligence activities are limited to those including foreign 

intelligence (FI) and counterintelligence (CI).6

 In general, this requirement translates to a 

requirement that such intelligence relate to the activities of international terrorists or, foreign 

powers, organizations, persons, and their agents. Moreover, to the extent that DoD intelligence 

components are authorized to collect FI or CI within the United States, they may do so only in 

coordination with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which has primary responsibility for 

intelligence collection within the United States.7 

When DoD Intelligence Components are conducting FI or CI, intelligence oversight (IO) rules 

apply. These rules govern the collection, retention, and dissemination of information concerning 

U.S. persons.8

 A U.S. person includes many unincorporated associations and U.S. corporations 

(e.g., “Joe’s Diner”).9

 Special emphasis is given to the protection of the constitutional rights and 

privacy of U.S. persons so the IO rules generally prohibit the acquisition of information concerning 

the domestic activities10 of any U.S. person. Questionable intelligence activities that run afoul of 

these and other restrictions must be reported in accordance with Procedure 15 of DoDD 5240.1-R 

under the procedures outlined in AR 381-10.11 

DoD 5240.1-R is divided into fifteen separate procedures that govern the collection, retention, and 

dissemination of intelligence. Collection of information on U.S. persons must be necessary to the 

functions (FI or CI) of the DoD intelligence component concerned.12 Procedures 2 through 4 

provide the sole authority by which DoD components may collect, retain, and disseminate 

information concerning U.S. persons. Procedures 5 through 10 set forth the applicable guidance for 

6

 “Foreign intelligence” means information relating to the capabilities, intentions, and activities of foreign powers, 

organizations, or persons, but not including counterintelligence except for information on international terrorist 

activities. Exec. Order No. 12,333, U.S. Intelligence Activities, para. 3.4(d) (Dec. 4, 1981) [hereinafter EO 12333]. 

“Counterintelligence” means information gathered and activities conducted to protect against espionage, other 

intelligence activities, sabotage, or assassinations conducted for or on behalf of foreign powers, organizations, or 

persons, or international terrorist activities, but not including personnel, physical, document, or communications 

security programs. Id. para. 3.4(a). 7 Id. para 1.14(a); Agreement Governing the Conduct of Defense Department Counterintelligence Activities in 

Conjunction with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (5 April 1979); and Supplement to 1979 FBI/DoD Memorandum 

of Understanding: Coordination of Counterintelligence Matters Between the FBI and DoD (20 June 1996). 

8

 Judge advocates must read these authorities before advising a commander on the collection of information in a 

domestic support operation. Further, AR 381-10 should be consulted when advising members of the intelligence 

community or if a questionable intelligence activity is identified. 

9

 “United States person” means a United States citizen, an alien known by the intelligence agency concerned to be a 

permanent resident alien, an unincorporated association substantially composed of United States citizens or permanent 

resident aliens, or a corporation incorporated in the United States, except for a corporation directed and controlled by a 

foreign government or governments. EO 12333, supra note 7, para. 3.4(i). 10 “Domestic activities” refers to activities that take place within the United States that do not involve a significant 

connection with a foreign power, organization, or person. DoD 5240.1-R, supra note 5, Procedure 2, para. B3. 

11 Evidence of questionable intelligence activities related to United States Persons must be reported to the TIG (SAIGIO) though there are several approved channels for reporting the information to include the DoD General Counsel. See 

paragraphs 15-2 through 15-4 of AR 381-10. 

12 Id. at 4.2.1. 

Chapter 9 

Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 138 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

the use of certain collection techniques to obtain information for foreign intelligence and 

counterintelligence purposes. Procedures 11 through 15 govern other aspects of DoD intelligence 

activities, including the oversight of such activities. In addition to the procedures themselves, the 

Defense Intelligence Agency, has published an instructive manual entitled The Intelligence Law 

Handbook (September 1995), to provide additional interpretive guidance to assist legal advisers, 

intelligence oversight officials, and operators in applying DoD 5240.1-R. In the absence of any 

foreign nexus, DoD intelligence components generally perform non-intelligence activities. A nonintelligence activity would be any activity that is conducted by or with a DoD Intelligence 

Component asset or capability, but which does not involve FI or CI; for example, the collection, 

retention, production, and dissemination of maps, terrain analysis, and damage assessments for a 

DSCA mission. When intelligence assets fly planned or disaster support missions, such as posthurricane operations, they are termed “incident awareness and assessment” (IAA) missions. When 

a Title 10 DoD intelligence component asset or capability is needed for a non-intelligence activity, 

specific authorization from the Secretary of Defense is required for both the mission and use of the 

DoD intelligence Component capability or asset. The intelligence oversight (IO) rules do not apply 

to non-intelligence activities so the SECDEF authorization must be sure to include any restrictions 

placed upon the assets or capabilities used in the domestic or domestic support operation. 

Whether DoD Intelligence Components are conducting an intelligence activity or a non-intelligence 

activity, certain rules universally apply to data and imagery collected from overhead and airborne 

sensors. Geospatial data, commercial imagery, and data or domestic imagery collected and 

processed by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) is subject to specific procedures 

covering the request for geospatial data or imagery and its use. Judge advocates should ensure that 

they are familiar with NGA policy on requests for geospatial data or imagery and its authorized use. 

Additionally, DoDD 5210.52, Security Classification of Airborne Sensor Imagery and Imaging 

Systems, and DIA Regulation (DIAR) 50-30, Security Classification of Airborne Sensor Imagery, 

provide specific guidance on mandatory security classification review of all data collected by 

airborne sensor platforms to determine whether it can be disseminated. 

In providing guidance to commanders on authorized use of DoD Intelligence Component 

capabilities and assets, and the products derived from the data collected, it is also important for 

judge advocates to understand the various platforms, their sensors, and how they operate. Issues to 

consider include: whether the sensor is fixed or moveable, whether the platform with the sensor can 

have its course altered during a mission, how is the data collected, transmitted, and processed, and 

the specific purpose of its mission. For example, a UAV may transmit data by live feed only to a 

line-of-sight receiver, or by satellite to a remote location. 

Evidence of a criminal act “incidentally” collected during an authorized mission using DoD 

Intelligence Component capabilities can be forwarded to the appropriate law enforcement agency 

(LEA); however, altering the course of an airborne sensor (such as an UAV) from an approved 

collection track to loiter over suspected criminal activities would no longer be incidental collection, 

and could result in a Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) violation unless specifically approved in advance. 

Certain data contains classified metadata which may need to be stripped at a remote site before it 

can be disseminated in an unclassified manner. Different platforms require different operational 

support, which requires planning on where it is positioned, considering the intended use. A 

domestic support operation using DoD Intelligence Component capabilities which includes support 

to law enforcement agencies (LEAs) will probably require a separate mission authority approval by 

SECDEF and will need to consider whether the data is to be exclusively transmitted to the LEA, 

Chapter 9 

139 Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

and where the LEA agents are located to control or direct use of the assets. Whether the collection 

platform and data transmission is wholly owned, operated, and received by a DoD Intelligence 

Component, a DoD non-Intelligence Component, or a combination of both will require careful 

consideration by judge advocates of the applicable rules and operational parameters and restrictions 

applicable for the mission. 

C. Information Handling and the Role of DoD Non-Intel Components 

DoD non-intelligence components also have restrictions. These restrictions relate to the acquisition 

of information concerning the activities of persons and organizations not affiliated with DoD. This 

type of information is needed every day for force protection missions, to include force protection in 

domestic support operations. Within the DoD, the Military Criminal Investigative Organizations 

(MCIOs) have primary responsibility for gathering and disseminating information about the 

domestic activities of U.S. persons that threaten DoD personnel or property. 

DoD components, other than the intelligence components, may acquire information concerning the 

activities of persons and organizations not affiliated with the DoD only in the limited circumstances 

authorized by DoD 5200.27, Acquisition of Information Concerning Persons and Organizations Not 

Affiliated with the Department of Defense. DoDD 5200.27 provides limitations on the types of 

information that may be collected, processed, stored, and disseminated about the activities of 

persons and organizations not affiliated with DoD. Those circumstances include the acquisition of 

information essential to accomplish the following DoD missions: protection of DoD functions and 

property, personnel security, and operations related to civil disturbances. 

The most commonly used exception in the Directive deals with the circumstance of protection of 

DoD functions and property. Initially this seems like a broad exception that would allow for the 

collection of information on U.S. persons in many situations. However, the Directive further 

defines an activity that threatens defense personnel, activities, and installations as “direct” threats to 

DoD personnel in connection with their official duties. Understanding the difference is crucial, and 

an example may assist in that understanding. It is not uncommon for protests to occur outside the 

main gate of an installation. Under the broad brush of “protecting” DoD property, it might seem 

appropriate to report the name of the protesting group to installation personnel. However, further 

analysis is first required in order to determine if this group poses a direct threat to the installation. 

If the group is quietly and calmly protesting, it’s unlikely they are a direct threat, and therefore 

information should not be collected on them by name.13 

Finally, note that it is a very rare situation when relevant information cannot be collected in some 

form by some entity. If an intelligence component cannot collect information because it is not FI or 

CI, then it may be possible for a non-intelligence component, such as the military police to collect 

the information. Therefore when analyzing the collection of information concerning USPERs, 

ensure that you consider both avenues of authorized collection. 

13 Note that while it would be counter to DoD 5200.27 to collect information on the activities of the group by stating 

“Group Against the Military (GAM) is protesting outside the front gate,” one could report all the necessary information 

without naming the group and therefore collecting on its activities. One could report that “a group who is not in support 

of the military is protesting outside the front gate” without losing relevant information. 

Chapter 9 

Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 140 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

D. The National Guard 

The National Guard presents a different set of challenges for the judge advocate as the NG’s 

mission regularly focuses on domestic threats. Notwithstanding, the National Guard does not 

generally conduct domestic intelligence operations. Primarily, domestic intelligence involving 

USPER is a law enforcement matter and is the responsibly of state / local law enforcement and the 

FBI. This activity, however, is not considered to be conducted by an intelligence entity so it falls 

outside of Army Regulation 381-10. However, the activity is governed by DoDD 5200.27.14 

The Joint Force Headquarters at the State (JFHQ-State) will have an Intelligence officer (J2) that is 

responsible for coordinating intelligence requirements for intelligence preparation of the 

environment (IPE) in support of state and federal missions. The J2 serves as the state’s executive 

agent for foreign threat information sharing between the local, state, and the national levels to 

ensure situational awareness and a common operating picture (COP). The J2 also interprets, 

develops, and implements intelligence and security guidance and policy for the JFHQ-State. The 

National Guard judge advocate must work in conjunction with the J2, and IG-IO in reviewing all 

intelligence plans, proposals and concepts, to include Proper Use Memoranda (PUMs), for legality 

and propriety. The state Provost Marshal (PM) also plays a vital role in developing the situational 

picture by being the lead liaison to the civilian law enforcement community. For this reason the NG 

judge advocate needs to determine four facts: 1) the status of the person doing the collecting; 2) 

whether that person is operating as part of an intelligence activity; 3) how the information is being 

collected; and, 4) the purpose behind the collection. 

1. Status: Title 32 or Title 10 

National Guard Soldiers can serve in three statuses, State Active Duty, Title 32, or Title 10, as 

explain in detail in Chapter 10. A Soldier’s status has a direct impact on the authorities at issue 

regarding the collection of information on USPER. This determination is therefore the first that 

must be answered. 

The National Guard may be called up for active duty by state governors or territorial Adjutants 

General to help respond to domestic emergencies and disasters, such as those caused by hurricanes, 

floods, and earthquakes. This status is commonly referred to as “state active duty” or SAD. The 

National Guard may also be called up for active duty by the Federal Government under Title 32 of 

the U.S. Code to perform training or other duties with or without the consent of the Soldiers. This 

status is traditionally referred to as Title 32. Finally, the National Guard may be federalized and fall 

under federal command and control, a status referred to as Title 10. 

Members of the NG intelligence community serving in a SAD or Title 32 status are not included in 

the definition of DoD intelligence component and as such are technically not regulated by 

intelligence oversight. However, the Chief of the National Guard Bureau established intelligence 

oversight policy that applies to all members of the National Guard serving in a Title 10 or Title 32 

status. This intelligence oversight policy requires that National Guard intelligence personnel 

operating in either a Title 10 or Title 32 status comply with all federal IO rules without exception. 

Furthermore, the policy recognizes that while National Guard intelligence personnel operating in a 

State Active Duty status are not members of the DoD intelligence community, they are limited by 

14 AR 380-10, para. 17-1(f). 

Chapter 9 

141 Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

their State law—to include state privacy laws—and are prohibited from engaging in what would be 

a DoD intelligence or counterintelligence mission while in a SAD status. In most states the 

collection, use, maintenance, and dissemination of information related to individuals by state 

agencies is strictly regulated; therefore, the practical affect is that even in a SAD status NG 

members cannot collect information on U.S. Persons.15 

Additionally, SAD personnel are prohibited from using DoD intelligence resources and equipment 

while in a SAD status. National Guard personnel in a SAD status are not authorized to engage in 

DoD intelligence operations nor are they authorized to access DoD classified systems (SIPRnet / 

JWICS -Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communication System) or equipment (MQ-1, border 

sensors) for a SAD mission without authorization from the NGB J2. 

2. Collection via an Intelligence Activity 

The responsibilities of the Soldier, not the MOS or duty title per se, determine whether the Soldier 

is part of an “intelligence activity.” Many states will either reassign intelligence personnel to a nonintelligence mission to assist the J34 force protection section, or will assign them to a unit that is 

specifically tasked to assist local law enforcement and authorized to provide intelligence support— 

such as the NG Counter Drug Units operating under 32 U.S.C. § 112 authority. While serving in a 

non-intelligence role, these individuals should not have access to intelligence-related equipment. 

If the person collecting the information is a part of the intelligence activity and is conducting 

missions as a member of an intelligence activity without separate special authority, then the person 

must follow the rule for Intelligence Oversight as provided in section B. If the person is not 

collecting the information as part of, or for an intelligence activity then the person must follow rules 

for the handling of USPERS information as provided in section C. 

An example of this latter group would be military law enforcement personnel. They are governed 

by the provisions of DoDD 5200.27. They are responsible for tracking and analyzing criminal 

threats to DoD and domestic threats to DoD. LE personnel liaise with other law enforcement 

agencies to develop the criminal threat situational picture. 

3. Method of Collecting 

Military Intelligence Equipment may only be used to conduct foreign intelligence related missions 

unless separate authorizations have been granted. This equipment therefore may only be operated 

by NG intelligence personnel serving in a Title 10 or Title 32 status. States wishing to utilize this 

equipment for other than foreign intelligence purpose must request authorization from the NGB J2. 

Legal review by NGB JA is required prior to such authorizations. Some Military Intelligence 

Equipment includes, but is not limited to, SIPRnet, JWICS (Joint Worldwide Intelligence 

Communication System), and ASAS-L (All Source Analysis System-Light). 

15 This policy memorandum is undergoing revision and will soon be published in a National Guard regulation titled, 

“Intelligence Oversight.” Until the new issuance is released, the current guidance entitled “All States Memorandum 

P08-0004, NGB Policy for Handling of U.S. Person Information (18 Jun. 2008)” remains in effect. 

Chapter 9 

Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 142 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

The National Guard has a variety of Incident Awareness and Assessment16 tools within its arsenal, 

many of which are not DoD Intelligence Assets. Some of the tools are considered to be both an 

intelligence asset and a non-intelligence asset and therefore a thorough analysis will look at not only 

the capability of the asset but also the sourcing and the authorized use to determine whether or not it 

is a true intelligence asset subject to IO and limitations applicable to Intelligence Equipment. A 

perfect example of this is the RC-26. The RC-26 in most states is a counter drug asset—not an 

intelligence asset even though it is capable of collecting imagery of USPERS. In accordance with 

each respective state counter-drug plan, RC-26’s mission is to assist law enforcement in the capture 

of personnel involved in drug activities. However, when disaster strikes RC-26 is often called upon 

to assist in life-saving situations. RC-26 provides an aerial surveillance capability that enables a 

commander to understand their area of operations, provide damage assessments, obstacle and 

hazard assessments, and other such non-intelligence purposes that incidentally collect information 

on USPERS and is not a per se violation, but commanders must be reminded that this information 

should not be retained and must be purged from military records as soon as possible. Likewise, a 

platform that uses a fixed or movable camera may limit incidental collection through careful 

planning of aerial surveillance routes and when possible, by avoiding populated areas. Any 

incidental collection of USPER information along the planned route that is criminal in nature, can 

be passed along to the appropriate law enforcement officials, but information should be purged from 

the retention platform as soon as possible. 

Domestic imagery collected by National Guard aerial imagery sensor platforms must be properly 

documented and approved via a Proper Use Memorandum (PUM). These PUMs must be in 

accordance with applicable Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) policy, “Proper Use Statements for 

Domestic Imagery.” The NGB-J2 publishes a PUM handbook to assist JFHQ-J2s on the protocol 

for submitting a PUM. National Guard judge advocates are responsible for reviewing these PUMs 

for compliance with federal and state law and National Guard policy. 

4. Purpose of the Collection 

A judge advocate must also determine whether information is being collected for an intelligence 

purpose or whether it is being collected to help the commander gain situational awareness. As 

mentioned earlier, information is often acquired in response to a National Guard commander’s need 

to establish a common operating picture. If the answer is for situational awareness, then the judge 

advocate should assist the command by helping shape the collection such that it is limited to the 

information actually needed to accomplish the mission. For example, if the mission requires 

imagery of ingress and egress routes, it is unnecessary for cameras to collect information regarding 

the license plate numbers of those individuals traveling on the roads; but it is necessary to carefully 

document the roads. Therefore, the recommendation can be to remind the collector not to focus on 

specific personal identifying information. 

16 Incident assessment and awareness (IAA) - The use of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) DoD 

intelligence capabilities for domestic non-intelligence activities approved by the Secretary of Defense, such as search 

and rescue (SAR), damage assessment and situational awareness. 

Chapter 9 

143 Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 
Sensitive Information Handling JFHQ States

J2

Legend

LES info

Intel Community Intel Data

J34 / PM

AT/FP

Law

LE Community

FPSUMS 

(Criminal (Criminal 

Stats, issues, Stats, issues, 

etc) 

DoD PM

Community

NGB

 

REDACT

(unless Foreign 

Nexus)

REDACT

(unless Threat)

J34 J2

SLFC

FBI

JTTF FIG

Driven by

TAG CCIRs

Driven by

TAG CCIRs

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

The chart below illustrates the proper flow of information to remain compliant with intelligence 

oversight regulations. It depicts how the J2 and Provost Marshall share and handle sensitive 

information (e.g., USPER) in accordance with both Intelligence Oversight regulations and DoDD 

Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 144

Intell gi ence

Domestic

Threats to DoD

Enforcement

Warnings

INTSUMS

Intel Brief Intel Brief

Intel Can & Should:

- Pass relevant data to LE/J34 without 

redaction

- Pass incidental data to LE/J34 without

redaction

- Review incoming data for intel value within

90 days; purge unneeded USPER data ASAP

- Redact data when putting in INTSUM or 

briefing

J34 Can & Should:

Foreign threat data

Counterintelligence

- Pass relevant data to J2/LE without 

redaction

- Redact data when putting in FPSUM or

briefing

- Redact or delete records within 90 days REDACT

REDACT

REDACT

Sensitive Information Handling JFHQ States

Intell gi ence

J2 

Legend

LES info

Intel Data

Legend 

LES info 

Intel Community 

Domestic 

Threats to DoD 

J34 / PM 

AT/FP 

Law Enforcement 

LE Community 

Warnings Warnings

INTSUMS INTSUMS

Intel Brief Intel Brief

FPSUMS

(Criminal (Criminal

Stats, issues, Stats, issues,

etc)

DoD PM 

Community 

Intel Can & Should: 

NGB 

- Pass relevant data to LE/J34 without 

redaction 

- Pass incidental data to LE/J34 without 

redaction 

- Review incoming data for intel value within 

90 days; purge unneeded USPER data ASAP 

- Redact data when putting in INTSUM or 

briefing 

J34 Can & Should: 

Foreign threat data 

Counterintelligence 

- Pass relevant data to J2/LE without 

redaction 

- Redact data when putting in FPSUM or 

briefing 

- Redact or delete records within 90 days REDACT

REDACT

REDACT 

J2 

REDACT 

(unless Threat) 

J34 

REDACT 

(unless Foreign 

Nexus) 

Driven by 

TAG CCIRs 

SLFC 

Driven by 

TAG CCIRs FBI 

JTTF FIG 

5200.27. 

E. Judge Advocate Responsibilities 

Judge advocates are responsible for the following: advising the commander and staff on all 

intelligence law and oversight matters within their purview; advising on the permissible acquisition 

and dissemination of information on non-DoD affiliated persons and organizations; recommending 

legally acceptable courses of action; establishing, in coordination with the Head Intelligence Officer 

(J-2/G-2/S-2/N-2) and the Inspector General (IG), an intelligence oversight program that helps 

ensure compliance with applicable law and policy; reviewing all intelligence plans, proposals, and 

concepts for legality and propriety; and training members of the command who are engaged in 

intelligence activities on all laws, policies, treaties, and agreements that apply to their activities. 

In order to properly perform these duties, judge advocates advising commanders on collecting 

intelligence and information should know and understand a variety of key types of information. 

Judge advocates must be familiar with the missions, plans, and capabilities of subordinate 

intelligence units, and all laws and policies (many of which are classified) that apply to their 

activities. At a minimum, judge advocates should be familiar with the restrictions on the collection, 

retention, and dissemination of information about U.S. persons and non-DoD persons and 

Chapter 9 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

organizations, the approval authorities for the various intelligence activities performed by 

subordinate units, and the requirement to report and investigate questionable activities and certain 

federal crimes.17 Judge advocates must also be familiar with the jurisdictional relationship between 

intelligence and counterintelligence activities as well as the parallel jurisdictions of force protection 

and law enforcement activities. Finally, judge advocates should establish close working 

relationships with the legal advisors of supporting intelligence agencies and organizations , all of 

whom can provide expert assistance. 

17 DoD 5240.1-R, supra note 4, Procedure 15. 

Chapter 9 

145 Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 

Chapter 9
 

Intelligence Oversight and Information Handling 146
 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 10 

RESERVE COMPONENTS, CIVIL AIR PATROL, U.S. COAST 

GUARD - STATUS AND RELATIONSHIPS 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 DoDD 1235.10 - Activation, Mobilization, and Demobilization of the Ready Reserve, 

November 26, 2008. 

•	 DoDD 5125.01 - Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, December 27, 2006 (with 

Chg. 1, June 4, 2008). 

•	 DoDD 6025.13 - Medical Quality Assurance (MQA) in the Military Health System (MHS), 

May 4, 2004. 

•	 DoDI 1215.13 - Reserve Component Member Participation Policy, May 11, 2009. 

•	 DoDI 1215.06 - Uniform Reserve, Training and Retirement Category Administration, February 

7, 2007 (with Chg. 2, December 25, 2008). 

•	 DoDD 1200.17 - Managing the Reserve Components as an Operational Force, October 29, 

2008. 

A. Introduction 

This chapter discusses the various reserve components and the importance of their designated status 

to the missions they may perform. First, the Reserve Component (RC) plays a significant role in 

domestic support operations. In numerous instances, particular military missions are located solely 

within them.1

 The RC provides trained and available units to its parent services in the event of war 

or national emergency.2

 The RC differs from the Active Component (AC) because it has unique 

personnel/duty categories that are important to understand because they not only determine what 

benefits and protections RC members have, but also the different types of duties that are authorized 

in particular personnel categories. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs 

(ASD(RA)) is responsible for overall supervision of all RC affairs in DoD and establishes the 

umbrella directives that provide guidance on activation, mobilization, and training.3 

Judge advocates practicing domestic operational law must also be familiar with the U.S. Coast 

Guard, the National Guard in a non-federal status, and the Civil Air Patrol because these entities 

have unique roles in domestic operations. In addition to being an armed force, the Coast Guard is 

also a federal law enforcement agency. While in a non-federal status, the Air and Army National 

1

 For example, the Air Force Reserves maintains a weather reconnaissance mission and the Naval Reserves is tasked 

with a mine countermeasure mission. 

2

 10 U.S.C. § 10102. Various efforts are underway by the services to improve mobilization processes. See 

Rebalancing Forces, Easing the Stress on the Guard and Reserve, 15 January 2004, Office of the Deputy Assistant 

Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs (Readiness, Training, and Mobilization). This report was a result of a 

memorandum issued by the Secretary of Defense on 9 July 2003, entitled Rebalancing Forces, in which he directed the 

services to review the use of the Reserve components and implement force rebalancing initiatives as necessary. 3

 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR 5125.01, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR RESERVE AFFAIRS (27 Dec. 2006) 

[hereinafter DoDD 5125.01]. 

Chapter 10 

147 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Guard have different authorities and capabilities in domestic missions.4

 Finally, the Civil Air 

Patrol, a nonprofit corporation, also serves as an auxiliary to the United States Air Force. 

B. Reserve Component 

The RC consists of the Army Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Naval Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, 

Coast Guard Reserve, Army National Guard of the United States, and the Air National Guard of the 

United States.5

 Members of the RC are a true reflection and extension of civilian society. The 

defense of the United States has been based in large part on the concept of these citizens who 

prepare for active service during peacetime and enter active duty in times of national emergency. 

These individuals have served the Nation since the Revolutionary War and continue to serve both in 

contingency operations overseas and in support of domestic operations. They form a vital link 

between the government, the Armed Forces, and the people.6 

1. U.S. Army Reserve (USAR)7 

The USAR’s mission is to meet Department of the Army contingency operations and mobilization 

requirements.8

 There are over 200,000 Soldiers in the USAR, most with Combat Support and 

Combat Service Support missions. Troop Program Units, discussed in paragraph C.1.a.(1) below, 

train together to mobilize as units. 

2. U.S. Air Force Reserve (USAFR)9 

The USAFR is composed of thirty-six wings that report to one of three Numbered Air Forces 

(NAFs). With just over ten percent of the Air Force’s manpower, the USAFR performs more than 

thirty percent of all Air Force missions. Like all of the other RCs, the role of the USAFR is to 

provide trained and ready forces to the USAF. Yet the USAFR also has several unique missions 

like the 731st Airlift Squadron, assigned to the 302nd Airlift Wing, Peterson Air Force Base, 

Colorado, which is trained in the use of modular airborne firefighting systems that support local, 

state, and federal agencies by dropping retardant chemicals to prevent the spread of fires. The 53rd 

Weather Reconnaissance Squadron at Keesler Air Force Base, Mississippi, performs hurricane 

reconnaissance exercises over the Atlantic, Pacific, Caribbean, and Gulf of Mexico and is the only 

DoD unit tasked to perform weather reconnaissance in support of the Department of Commerce.10 

4 See DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App 10-6, Role of the NG in Domestic Support Operations. 5 10 U.S.C. § 10101. 

6 See generally U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, HANDBOOK 1215.15, para. C2.1. (Jun. 1996). 7

 U.S. DEPT’ OF ARMY, REG. 140-1, MISSION, ORGANIZATION, AND TRAINING (1 Jan. 2004) [hereinafter AR 140-1]; 

U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 140-10, ASSIGNMENTS, ATTACHMENTS, DETAILS, AND TRANSFERS (15 Aug. 2005); U.S. 

DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 140-30, ACTIVE DUTY IN SUPPORT OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVE (USAR) AND ACTIVE 

GUARD RESERVE (AGR) MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (1 Sept. 1994). 8

 AR 140-1, supra note 7, para. 1-8. 9

 U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 36-2132, FULL-TIME SUPPORT TO ACTIVE AND RESERVE PROGRAM (27 Mar. 2002); 

U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 36-2619, MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATION MAN-DAY PROGRAM (22 Jul. 1994); 

U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, MANUAL, 36-8001 RESERVE PERSONNEL PARTICIPATION AND TRAINING PROCEDURES (22 

Jan. 2004). 

10 The unit program of the USAFR is called the “Category A” program. Personnel perform a minimum of one weekend 

of inactive duty training every month, referred to as a unit training assembly (UTA), and two weeks of active duty 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 148 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

3. U.S. Naval Reserve (USNR)11 

The Naval Reserve is composed of both commissioned units (self-contained, deployable assets with 

both personnel and mission equipment and hardware) and augmentation units (non-hardware units 

that provide trained manpower to active Navy units). The USNR is a significant force multiplier for 

the Navy and Marine Corps and represents twenty percent of the Navy’s total assets. Unique 

missions to this reserve branch include a Mine Countermeasure Ship, Mobile Inshore Undersea 

Warfare Units, and Helicopter Warfare Support Squadrons. 

4. U.S. Marine Corps Reserve (USMCR)12 

The Marine Corps Reserve is composed of one Marine division, one Marine air wing, one service 

support group, and a Marine Corps Reserve support command. Select Marine Corps Reserve 

(SMCR) units consist of more than 19,000 Reserves from 4th Marine Division (4th MARDIV); 

7,000 from 4th Marine Aircraft Wing (4th MAW); 8,000 from 4th Force Service Support Group 

(4th FSSG); I Marine Expeditionary Force Augmentation Command Element (I MACE), Pacific; 

and II Marine Expeditionary Force Augmentation Command Element (II MACE), Atlantic. Unique 

missions to this reserve branch include Civil Affairs Groups and Air-Naval Gunfire Liaison 

Companies. 

5. U.S. Coast Guard Reserve (USCGR)13 

The USCGR, like its active duty counterpart, is an agency within the Department of Homeland 

Security. Under Title 14 and Title 10 of the United States Code, the Coast Guard is at all times an 

armed force, as well as a law enforcement agency. As an armed force, the Coast Guard is required 

to maintain a state of readiness to function as a specialized service in the Navy in time of war or 

upon Presidential declaration. The Coast Guard, discussed at paragraph f, below, is a unique 

member of the Joint Force because of a mix of military, civil law enforcement, and regulatory 

authorities that allows it to respond to a wide variety of national security missions at home and 

abroad. 

Coast Guard reservists may be called in response to serious natural or man-made disasters, 

accidents, or catastrophes such as hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, or floods. The Secretary of 

Homeland Security is authorized to order members of the Coast Guard Ready Reserve to active 

(annual training) for pay and points each fiscal year. The “Category B” program is the individual mobilization 

augmentee program consisting of individual reservists assigned to major commands, field operating agencies, joint 

organizations, direct reporting units and outside agencies. Although some commands allow training with other units in 

the member’s local area, this decision is made on a case-by-case basis by the individual command. Inactive duty 

training, or IDT, periods for pay and points, are usually performed during the week in increments of 4 IDTs per quarter. 

A day is worth two IDT points. Members also perform a 12-14 day paid active duty training tour annually with one 

point awarded for each day. In the “Category E” program, personnel do not earn pay for their service, but they do earn 

retirement points. Examples are service with the Civil Air Patrol Assistance Program and the Chaplain reinforcement 

designees. 

11 U.S. DEP’T OF NAVY, CHIEF OF NAVAL OPS, INSTR. 1001.20C, STANDARDIZED POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR ACTIVE 

DUTY FOR SPECIAL WORKS (ADSW) (4 Mar. 2008). 

12 U.S. Marine Corps, Order 1001.52H, Active Reserve Support to the Reserve Component (RC) (17 Dec. 1996); U.S. 

Marine Corps, Order 1001.59, Active Duty for Special Work in Support of the Total Force (22 Oct. 2001). 

13 U.S. COAST GUARD RESERVE POLICY MANUAL, COMDTINST M1001.28A, (18 May 2003). 

Chapter 10 

149 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

duty without their consent in a domestic emergency.14 They may be used for not more than 60 days 

in any four-month period and not more than 120 days in any two-year period to augment the 

Regular Coast Guard in times of serious natural or manmade disasters, accidents, or catastrophes. 

A unique mission to the USCGR is port security; the USCGR provides 95% of this capability. 

Under 10 U.S.C. § 12302, the USCGR also provides key support to Operation Iraqi Freedom and 

Operation Enduring Freedom.
 

6. National Guard of the United States (NGUS) 

a. Overview 

The terms “Army National Guard of the United States” (ARNGUS) and “Air National Guard of the 

United States” (ANGUS) refer to the guard as a reserve component of their respective service.15 

The term “federal service,” is applied to National Guard members and units when ordered to active 

duty in their reserve component status or called into federal service in their militia status under 

various sections of Title 10 of the U.S. Code. 

The terms “Army National Guard”(ARNG) and “Air National Guard” (ANG) refer to the federally 

recognized (and usually federally trained under Title 32, U.S. Code) organized militia of the various 

states, in other words, Guardsmen in a “state status” pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Clause 16 of 

the Constitution.16 

Determining whether National Guard members are in the ARNGUS/ANGUS or the ARNG/ANG is 

critical to defining their roles and responsibilities. Status is also the primary factor for determining 

the applicability of law for such issues as benefits, protections, and liabilities. For instance, guard 

members only become subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) when federalized; 

while in a state status they are subject to their respective state codes of military justice. 

Additionally, some laws, such as the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) only apply to the National Guard 

when they are in a Title 10 status. National Guard members are relieved from duty in the National 

Guard when on federal active duty as a member of the NGUS under 32 U.S.C. § 325. Per the 

National Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2004, 32 U.S.C. § 325 was amended to allow 

National Guard officers to retain command authority over state forces with the approval of POTUS 

and the consent of the Governor.

17 

Guard personnel in Title 10 and Title 32 (discussed under National Guard of the Several States 

section below) status receive federal pay and are covered under the Federal Torts Claims Act. Title 

10 personnel always receive federal military retirement credit for the performance of duty. 

Similarly, Title 32 personnel also receive such credit, unless in an inactive duty training (IDT) 

status. It is important to remember that the determination of whether the National Guard is in 

federal or state service does not rest on the entity that funds the activity, but rather which entity has 

command and control. 

14 14 U.S.C. § 712. 15 10 U.S.C. §§ 101(c), 10101. 

16 See 10 U.S.C. § 101; 32 U.S.C. §§ 301, 307. 17 See DOPLAW Handbook, Supp., App. 10-7 for a comparison the National Guard in their different statuses. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 150 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

b. History 

In 1903, the organized militia (i.e., the National Guard) was created.18 The National Defense Act of 

1916 further strengthened the organization and training of the National Guard.19 Because members 

of the National Guard had to be drafted as individuals for service in World War I, Congress in 1933 

amended the National Defense Act of 1916 to establish the dual status of the National Guard by 

creating the “two overlapping but distinct organizations,” i.e., the National Guard of the various 

states and the National Guard of the United States.20 Although Guardsmen were relieved from their 

militia status while on federal status, at the conclusion of that service, they reverted to their state 

status. In other words, this statute created the dual enlistment requirement that we know today.21 

c. Federal Missions 

Like the other RCs, ARNGUS/ANGUS22 members and units augment the Armed Forces during 

wars or other conflicts. To become an ARNGUS or ANGUS member, the Guardsman or unit must 

18 Dick Military Act of 1903, 57 Pub. L. No. 33, 32 Stat. 775; see also Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334,
 

342 (1990).
 19 National Defense Act of 1916, 64 Pub. L. 85; see also Perpich, 496 U.S. 334, 343–44. 

20 National Guard Act of 1933, 73 Pub. L. 64, § 18. See also Perpich, 496 U.S. 334, 345–46. 21 A system that the Perpich Court recognized as a statutory creation causing a member of the militia to be relieved 

from state status for the “entire period of federal service.” Perpich, 496 U.S. 334, 345–346. 22 When ANG members enter Title 10 active duty, they are transferred from their ANG units and assigned to the Air 

National Guard Readiness Center (ANGRC), either directly or to a detachment of the ANGRC created for the purpose 

of deploying forces in support of an active duty mission. The ANGRC is a Field Operating Agency (FOA) of HQ
 

USAF that executes NGB policy for the ANG and ANGUS and exercises elements of command and control over
 

ANGUS units and members. It is a Title 10 organization with a 32 U.S.C. § 104 commander appointed on G-series 

orders. The ANGRC commander, currently a brigadier general, also serves as the Deputy Director of the ANG 

Directorate and is on Title 10 orders. See also U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 10-402, MOBILIZATION PLANNING, 

para 2.2 (9 Aug. 2007)) [hereinafter AFI 10-402]; NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, MEMORANDUM 10-5/38-101,
 

ORGANIZATIONS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, ch. 4 (1 Jul. 2003).
 

ANGRC exercises administrative control (ADCON) over all units and members in Title 10 status (except those brought 

on active duty through full mobilization) because they are assigned to ANGRC. ADCON includes: organization of
 

forces; personnel management; control of resources and logistics; training, readiness, and mobilization; and discipline. 

ADCON flows from the National Command Authorities through the Secretary of the Air Force, Chief of Staff of the Air 

Force, Major Commands, and Numbered Air Forces to a unit. A commander exercises ADCON over all assigned 

forces, but not over attached forces. For attached forces, ADCON remains with the commander to whom they are 

assigned. For example, when forces are assigned to ANGRC but temporarily attached to another unit, ADCON remains 

with ANGRC. See U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, HANDBOOK 10-416, PERSONNEL, READINESS, AND MOBILIZATION, para
 

6.8.4 (22 Dec. 1994) [hereinafter AFH 10-416]. These ADCON/OPCON rules differ for full mobilization when guard 

personnel become part of the active component. See AFI 10-402 para 9.5; AFH 10-416, supra paras 5.4, 6.8.3. 

ANGRC/CC makes forces available to a supported active duty commander by attaching them to the gaining 

organization that will exercise operational control (OPCON) over them. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 

gives the COMAFFOR or any active duty commander within the chain of command the right to discipline any person 

serving in Title 10 status. UCMJ authority is a function of command under federal law and the Manual for CourtsMartial. Command authority for discipline includes UCMJ authority as an element of ADCON, which, for members of 

an ANGRC detachment, is within the command authority of ANGRC. Discipline is also an element of specified 

ADCON, which is within the command authority of the COMAFFOR. ADCON and specified ADCON do not confer 

UCMJ authority but identify those commanders who may exercise UCMJ authority as a matter of Air Force doctrine 

and policy in recognition that more than one commander may have UCMJ authority over a member in a given situation. 

Since disciplinary authority is shared between the commanders holding ADCON and specified ADCON, it is frequently 

a matter of coordination between the two concerning which one will take disciplinary action. U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, 

Chapter 10 

151 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

also be “federally recognized.”23 To be federally recognized, the Guardsman or unit must meet 

prescribed federal standards.24 NG units or members may be ordered to federal active duty in one 

of two ways. One way is to order NG members or units to active federal duty, with the consent of 

the governor, as members of the ARNGUS or ANGUS, the reserve components.25 The other way is 

pursuant to the power of Congress to call out the militia to enforce federal law, suppress 

insurrections, or repel invasions; under this authority the NG is “called” to duty as part of the militia 

of the United States.26 Congress has given the President the authority to call the NG to active duty 

for these purposes.27 

Moreover, the National Guard has both a federal mission (when called up by Congress or activated 

by the President under applicable laws) and a state mission (inherent police power authority of the 

states) to ensure that the laws of the United States and the respective states are obeyed and to 

protect the people and property of the United States. This domestic portion of the NGUS federal 

mission is just as important as the National Guard’s federal mission to augment the Armed Forces 

during wars or other conflicts outside of the United States. 

d. Other Title 10 Duty 

In addition to duties performed when federalized under the aforementioned authorities, members of 

the National Guard serve in a full-time Title 10 status in other ways. Members in this category 

include: Members of the National Guard Bureau (NGB); U.S. Property and Fiscal Officers 

(USPFO) in each state serving the National Guard;28 any other National Guard members serving a 

tour of duty under Title 10 in support of NGB, Major Commands, or other “seats of government” 

tours. 

(1) National Guard Bureau (NGB) 

The 2008 National Defense Authorization Act made major changes to the roles and responsibilities 

of the NGB. Significantly, NGB was designated in statute as a “joint activity” of DoD, serving as 

the NG channel of communications between the Army and Air Force and the fifty-four states and 

territories.29 While the NGB serves as the coordination, administrative, policy, and logistical center 

INSTR. 51-202, NONJUDICIAL PUNISHMENT, para 3.7 (7 Nov. 2003) requires the USAF to coordinate with the parent 

reserve organization before imposing nonjudicial punishment. 

ANGRC usually creates detachments and assigns ANGUS members to them for deployments that involve 10 or more 

persons for 15 days or longer. If a deployed group is less than 10 persons, or a deployment will not be for more than 15 

days or does not include an officer, then ANGUS members are attached directly to the 201st Mission Support Squadron 

(201MSS), a Title 10 subordinate unit to ANGRC. ADCON and OPCON apply in the same manner to those directly 

attached to 201MSS as they apply to ANGRC detachments. 

23 10 U.S.C. §§ 10105, 10111, 10503(7), 12201, 12211, 12212; 32 U.S.C. § 105(b). 24 See NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, REG. 10-1, ORGANIZATION AND FEDERAL RECOGNITION OF ARMY NATIONAL 

GUARD UNITS (22 NOV. 2002); U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 38-101, AIR FORCE ORGANIZATION (21 APR. 2004). 

25 U.S. CONST. art. 1, § 8, cl. 12; Perpich, 496 U.S. at 334; 10 U.S.C. §§ 12301–12304. 26 U.S. CONST. art. I, § 8, cl. 15; 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–333 (these statutes also include the use of the Armed Forces of
 

which the NGUS is part); 10 U.S.C. § 12406. Although these statutes are in Title 10 of the U.S. Code, members “called 

up” under these provisions retain their militia status. 

27 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–333. 28 32 U.S.C. § 708. 

29 10 U.S.C. § 10501. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 152 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

for the ARNG and the ANG, NGB does not command and control either the Army or Air National 

Guard. Pursuant to its charter, NGB is responsible for, among other things, implementing Army 

and Air Force guidance, prescribing and monitoring training discipline and requirements, and 

supervising and administering the budgets of the ARNG and ANG.30 

The Chief, NGB, a four-star general, is the principal advisor on NG matters to the Secretaries of the 

Army and Air Force and to the Army and Air Force Chiefs of Staff. The Chief, NGB, has executive 

agent responsibility for planning and coordinating the execution of NG military support operations. 

The Director, ARNG, and the Director, ANG, are responsible to the Chief, NGB. The Chief 

Counsel’s office at NGB provides legal advice and assistance to the Chief, NGB, the Directors of 

the Army and Air National Guards, and to the full-time judge advocates at the state level. The 

Chief Counsel’s office normally employs a joint staff of military and civilian attorneys in a wide 

variety of disciplines, including administrative law, contract and fiscal law, international and 

operational law, environmental law, legislation, labor law, and litigation. 

(2) U.S. Property and Fiscal Officers (USPFO) 

Each state and territory has a USPFO. As Title 10 officers assigned to the NGB, a USPFO is 

detailed for duty to a state or territory and is accountable for all federal funds and property 

provided to the NG of each state.31 The USPFO and his staff also perform functions relating to 

supply, transportation, internal review, data processing, contracting, and financial support for the 

state NG. 32 When required, the USPFO staff can support AC or other RC forces on a 

reimbursable basis. 

e. Other NG Authorities for Duty 

Guardsmen perform Inactive Duty Training (IDT) and Annual Training (AT) in a Title 32 status. 

They can also perform Active Duty for Operational Support (ADOS) in a Title 10 status to support 

the ANG and ARNG at federal headquarters levels.33 As noted above, some “AGR” tours are also 

in a Title 10 status. They also perform ADOS in a Title 10 status to support Active Component 

requirements; this duty is paid by Army and Air Force appropriations.34 

C. Reserve Component Categories 

There are three Reserve categories: Ready Reserve, Standby Reserve, and Retired Reserve. Each 

member of the National Guard and Reserve is assigned within one of these categories. All members 

30 DEP’T OF DEFENSE DIR. 5105.77, National Guard Bureau (NGB) (21 May 2008). 31 32 U.S.C. 708. 

32 National Guard Bureau Reg. 130-6/Air National Guard Instruction 36-2, United States Property and Fiscal Officer 

Appointment, Duties, and Responsibilities (1 July 2007). 

33 See U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 135-200, ACTIVE DUTY FOR MISSIONS, PROJECTS, AND TRAINING FOR RESERVE 

COMPONENT SOLDIERS, ch. 6 (30 Jun. 1999). 

34 See id. ch. 2, sec.521 of the FY 2001 National Defense Authorization Act, which exempts reserve officers on the 

reserve active-status list (RASL) serving on active duty for three years or less from placement on the active-duty list 

(ADL). Previously, these Soldiers were added to the ADL for promotion. 

Chapter 10 

153 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

of the Army National Guard and Air National Guard, including those in the Inactive National Guard 

(ING), are in the Ready Reserve or Retired Reserve.35 

1. Ready Reserve 

The Ready Reserve consists of three subgroups: the Selected Reserve, the Individual Ready 

Reserve, and the Inactive National Guard. These are units and individuals subject to order to active 

duty to augment the Active Forces during a time of war or national emergency.36 This chapter will 

primarily address the Selected Reserve. 

a. Selected Reserve 

The Selected Reserve consists of Soldiers assigned to Reserve Component units, Individual 

Mobilization Augmentation (IMA) Program, Drilling Individual Mobilization Augmentation 

(DIMA) Program, and the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Program. These individuals and units are 

considered essential to wartime missions and have priority for training and equipment over other 

RC categories. 

(1) Drilling Unit Reservists 

Sometimes called Troop Program Units (TPU), these units consist of Soldiers assigned to Tables of 

Organization and Equipment or Tables of Distribution and Allowances who normally perform at 

least 48 inactive duty training (IDT) assemblies and not less than 15 days, exclusive of travel time, 

of annual training (AT) each year. In the alternative, they may perform Active Duty for Training 

(ADT) for no more than 30 days each year, unless otherwise specifically prescribed by the 

Secretary of Defense.37 

(2) Individual Mobilization Augmentees and Drilling Individual Mobilization 

Augmentees 

IMAs and DIMAs are RC officers assigned to USAR Control Group—IMAs in a Selected Reserve 

status and not attached to an organized Reserve unit. The IMA Program function is to provide 

qualified soldiers to fill pre-designated mobilization required positions. IMAs are assigned to 

Active Component organizations or Selective Service System positions that must be filled to 

support mobilization requirements, contingency operations, operations other than war, or other 

specialized or technical requirements. Drilling IMA positions are identified as critical elements for 

mobilization during a Presidential Reserve Call-up (PRC) requiring an incumbent to maintain an 

even higher level of proficiency than a regular IMA Soldier. Soldiers assigned to these positions 

35 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, INST. 1215.06, UNIFORM RESERVE TRAINING AND RETIREMENT CATEGORIES, para. E5.1 (4 

May 2004) [hereinafter DoDI 1215.06]. 

36 Id. para. E.5.1.1. These individuals and units may be involuntarily ordered to active duty during war or national
 

emergency under the authority of 10 U.S.C. §§ 12301, 12302 and 14 U.S.C. § 712. 

37 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, INST. 1215.13, RESERVE COMPONENT MEMBER PARTICIPATION POLICY, Encl. 2, para. 

1.a.(2) (11 May 2009). 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 154 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

are authorized to perform 48 paid IDT period per year. The Selective Service System can perform 

36 IDT periods per year. All IMAs must perform a minimum of 12 days of AT each year.38 

(3) Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) Program 

The AGR Program consists of Soldiers performing active duty or full-time National Guard duty 

(FTNGD) for 180 days or more for the purpose of organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, 

or training the Reserves. 

b. Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) 

The IRR is a manpower pool of pre-trained individuals who have already served in Active 

Component units or in the Selected Reserve and have some part of their Military Service Obligation 

(MSO) remaining. Some members volunteer to remain in the IRR beyond their MSO or contractual 

obligation and participate in programs providing a variety of professional assignments and 

opportunities for earning retirement points and military benefits.39 IRR members are subject to 

involuntary active duty and fulfillment of mobilization requirements. 

c. The Inactive National Guard (ING) 

The ING consists of National Guard personnel in an inactive status in the Ready Reserve, not in the 

Selected Reserve, attached to a specific National Guard unit. These individuals must muster once a 

year with their unit, but they do not participate in training activities. They may not, however, train 

for points or pay and are not eligible for promotion.40 

2. Standby Reserve 

The Standby Reserve consists of personnel who are maintaining their military affiliation without 

being in the Ready Reserve, but have been designated key civilian employees, or have a temporary 

hardship or disability. They are not required to perform training and are not part of units. The 

Standby Reserve is a pool of trained individuals who may be mobilized as needed to fill manpower 

needs in specific skills.41 

38 DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. E.25.1.1.1.3. The Army National Guard and the Air National Guard do not have 

IMA programs. 

39 Id. para. E.5.1.1.2. The IRR also may include personnel participating in officer training programs, including the 

Merchant Marine Academy, enlisted members awaiting IADT (except for those in the National Guard), who are not 

authorized to perform IDT, and members of the Delayed Entry Program. Id.
 40 Id. para. E.5.1.1.3. The Air National Guard does not have an inactive status.
 41 Id. para. E.5.1.2. The Standby Reserve consists of the active status list and the inactive status list categories. 

Members designated as key employees and personnel not having fulfilled their statutory MSO, or temporarily assigned
 

for hardship reasons intending to return to the Ready Reserve, are on the active status list. Those members who are not
 

required to remain in an active program, but who retain Reserve affiliation in a non-participating status and whose skill 

may be of future use to the Armed Force are on the inactive status list. These members cannot participate in prescribed
 

training and are not eligible for pay or promotion and do not accrue credit for years of service. The Army National 

Guard and Air National Guard do not have a Standby Reserve.
 

Chapter 10 

155 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

3. Retired Reserve 

This category consists of all Reserve personnel transferred to the Retired Reserve. These 

individuals may voluntarily train with or without pay.42 All members retired for having completed 

the requisite years of active duty service (Regular or Reserve), regardless of the retired list where 

assigned, may be ordered to active duty when required by the Secretary of the Military Department 

concerned.43 

D. Reserve Component Training and Support 

The Service Secretaries and the Commandant of the Coast Guard are required to ensure trained and 

qualified RC units and individuals are available for AD throughout the entire spectrum of 

requirements, including war or national emergency, contingency operations, military operations 

other than war, operational support, humanitarian operations, and at such other times as the national 

security may require.44 Each military department has its own regulations and instructions that 

implement these training and support duties.45 

1. Training 

All RC members receive training according to their assignment and required readiness levels. This 

training may be conducted in Active Duty, Inactive Duty for Training, or Full-Time National Guard 

status. 

a. Active Duty 

Active Duty for Training (ADT) consists of structured individual and unit training, including onthe-job training, or educational courses to RC members. It includes Initial Active Duty training 

(IADT),46 Annual Training (AT), and Other Training Duty (OTD). Initial ADT includes basic 

military training and technical skill training required for all enlisted accessions. AT is the minimum 

period of active duty training that RC members must perform each year to satisfy the training 

requirements associated with their RC assignment. By DoD policy, members of the Selected 

Reserve must perform AT. For all members of Selected Reserve units, except for those in the 

42 Id. para. E.5.1.3. The Retired Reserve consists of the following retired categories: (1) Reserve members who have 

completed the requisite qualifying years creditable for non-regular retired pay and are receiving retired pay (at, or after, 

age 60); (2) those who have completed the requisite qualifying years creditable for non-regular retired pay and are not
 

yet 60 years of age, or are age 60 and have not applied for non-regular retirement pay; (3) those members retired for 

physical disability; (4) members who have completed 20 years of service creditable for regular retired pay, or are 30­

percent or more disabled and otherwise qualified; (5) Reserve members who have completed the requisite years of
 

active service and are receiving regular retired or retainer pay (regular enlisted personnel of the Navy and Marine Corps 

with 20 to 30 years of active Military Service who are transferred to the Fleet Naval Reserve or the Fleet Marine Corps 

Reserve on retirement, until they have completed 30 years of total active and retired or retainer service, are not included
 

in this category); and (6) Reserve members drawing retired pay for other than age, service requirements, or physical 

disability. 

43 10 U.S.C. § 688. 44 DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. 5.2.2. Combatant commanders have oversight responsibility for the training and
 

readiness of assigned guard and reserve forces. 

45 Id. 46 DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. 6.6.4.1.4. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 156 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

National Guard, that training is not less than 14 days, and not less than 12 days for the Coast Guard 

Reserve. As previously noted, IMAs and DIMAs must perform 12 days of AT each year and 

National Guard units must perform full-time military training for at least 15 days each year. OTD is 

used to provide all other structured training, including on-the-job training and attendance at schools. 

ADT is funded by the RC, but may support active component operational requirements and 

missions.47 

b. Inactive Duty for Training (IDT) 

This training is used to provide structured individual and unit training, or educational courses to RC 

members. It includes regularly scheduled training periods, additional training periods,48 and 

equivalent training. It is funded by the Reserve Component.49 

c. Full-time National Guard Duty (FTNGD) 

The National Guard performs their federal training in a Title 32 status. Thus, while the various 

terms used above also apply to the National Guard, there are variations. Full time National Guard 

duty (FTNGD) is training or other duty (including support), other than inactive duty, performed by 

a member of the National Guard in a member’s status as a member of the National Guard of a state, 

territory under 32 U.S.C.A. §§ 316, 502, 503, 504, 505. It is considered active service pursuant to 

10 U.S.C.A. § 101(d)(3), but it is not considered “active duty.” (For other reserve components, 

some of the categories above are active duty.) 

2. Support 

RC members may be placed on Active Duty Other than for Training (ADOT), which includes the 

categories of active duty for operational support (ADOS), Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) duty, 

and involuntary AD. Support may also be provided during FTNGD, discussed above.50 

a. Active Duty for Operational Support (ADOS) 

The purpose of ADOS is to provide the necessary skilled manpower assets to support existing or 

emerging requirements. Because ADOS is intended to provide only temporary support, total 

cumulative FTNGD, including ADOS, is limited to 1,095 days in the previous 1,460 days.51 

47 DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. 6.1.4.1. 

48 Additional IDT periods are for the use of drilling Reservists who are not military technicians. They include 

additional training periods (ATPs) for units, components of units, and individuals for accomplishing additional required 

training; additional flying and flight training periods (AFTPs) for primary aircrew members for conducting aircrew 

training and combat crew qualification training; and Readiness management periods (RMPs) to support the following 

functions in preparing units for training: the ongoing day-to-day operation of the unit, accomplishing unit 

administration, training preparation, support activities, and maintenance functions. DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. 

6.1.2.
 49 DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. 6.1.2.1. Paid IDT periods cannot be under 4 hours. No more than two IDT 

periods may be performed in any calendar day. In addition, IDT for points only (without pay) cannot be less than 2
 

hours with a maximum of two points authorized in any one calendar day. Further, one retirement point in any one 

calendar day can be granted for attendance at a professional or trade convention, with a minimum of four hours. 

50 DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. 6.1.5.3.
 51 DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. 6.1.4.2.1.7.
 

Chapter 10 

157 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Periods of service exceeding this limitation are accounted against active duty end strength.52 

ADOS may be funded by the Active Component to support AC functions. In the Army, these tours 

are called Temporary Tours of Active Duty (TTAD); in the Air Force, they are called MPA mandays. ADOS also may be funded by the RC to support RC functions. 

In 2006, as a result of the increasing use of the National Guard for domestic missions of national 

importance, such as the response to Hurricane Katrina, Congress amended 32 U.S.C. § 502(f) to 

expressly authorize the use of the National Guard for “Support of operations or missions undertaken 

by the member’s unit at the request of the President or Secretary of Defense.”53 

b. Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) 

This duty is funded by the RC and performed by an RC member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, 

Marine Corps, Coast Guard, or FTNGD performed by a member of the NG under an order to active 

duty or FTNGD for a period of 180 days or more. Unless a statutory exception exists, the scope of 

duty for AGRs is limited to organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve 

components.54 

c. Involuntary Active Duty (IAD) 

IAD is used in support of military operations when the President or the Congress determines that 

RC forces are required to augment the AC. IAD is funded by the AC.55 

3. Military Technicians (Dual Status) (MT)56 

Military Technicians are civilian employees who are required to maintain military membership in a 

RC and who perform administration and training of that RC or maintenance and repair of supplies 

or equipment issued to that RC. Military and civilian positions must be compatible. Though the 

NG also has technicians, they are administered differently as discussed below. 

E. Mobilization/Activation of Reserve Component and Calling Up the Militia 

For major regional conflicts and national emergencies, access to RC units and individuals through 

an order to AD without their consent is assumed. For lesser regional conflicts, domestic 

emergencies, and other missions, where capabilities of the RC could be required, maximum 

consideration is given to accessing volunteer RC units and individuals before seeking authority to 

order member of the RC to active duty without their consent.57 

It is important to distinguish the ARNGUS and ANGUS from the Air National Guard (ANG) and 

the Army National Guard (ARNG). Unlike the ARNGUS and ANGUS, which are RC 

52 Id. 53 32 U.S.C. § 502(f)(2).
 

54 10 U.S.C. § 101(d)(6)(A). Other statutes include 10 U.S.C. §§ 10211, 10302, 12310, and 12402. 

55 DoDI 1215.06, supra note 35, para. E.3.1.1.2.3; see also 10 U.S.C. §§ 12301, 12302, 12304, and 14 U.S.C. § 712. 

56 10 U.S.C. § 10216. 

57 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 1235.10, ACTIVATION, MOBILIZATION, AND DEMOBILIZATION OF THE READY RESERVE, 

para. 4.1. (26 Nov. 2008) [hereinafter DoDD 1235.10]. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 158 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

organizations under the command and control of the President of the United States, the ANG and 

ARNG train for their federal military missions according to the congressionally established 

disciplines under Title 32, United Stated Code, under state control as members of their respective 

states’ militia. ARNG/ANG members also take oaths to obey their respective governors and abide 

by state law. 

Although the terms “activation” and “mobilization” are sometimes used interchangeably to describe 

the process that “federalizes” reservists, the terms have different meanings. Activation is an order 

to active duty, for units and individuals, (other than for training) in the federal service pursuant to 

statutory authority granted to the President, Congress, or the service secretaries.58 Reservists can be 

“activated” involuntarily or voluntarily with their consent (Guardsmen also need the consent of their 

respective governors). Mobilization is the process of bringing all national resources to a state of 

readiness for war or national emergency; it includes activating the RC.59 Levels of mobilization 

include selective mobilization, partial mobilization, full mobilization, and total mobilization. 

Therefore it is more helpful to use the term “activate” when referring to placing a reservist on active 

duty rather than using the more encompassing term “mobilize.” The following statutes provide 

authority for activating reservists/calling up the militia.”60 

1. Full Mobilization (10 U.S.C. A. § 12301(a)) 

A full mobilization occurs through the duration of a war or emergency (plus six months). This 

section may only be invoked when there is a congressional declaration of national emergency or 

war, or other authorization in law. 

2. Partial Mobilization (10 U.S.C. A. § 12302(a)) 

A presidential declaration of national emergency or “when otherwise authorized by law” allows the 

involuntary partial mobilization of up to 1,000,000 members of the Ready Reserve for up to 2 years. 

Applies to units, and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit. 

3. Presidential Reserve Call-up (PRC) (10 U.S.C. A. § 12304) 

Involuntary activation of 200,000 members for up to 270 days (these troops are excluded from 

active duty end strength calculations) by the President. Such service must be for other than training 

and may not exceed 270 days. It authorizes ordering members of the RC to active duty without 

their consent, without declaration of war or national emergency, for operations other than domestic 

disasters except those involving a use or threatened use of a weapon of mass destruction. 

58 See generally id.; JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, JOINT PUB. 4-05, JOINT MOBILIZATION PLANNING (11 Jan. 2006). 

59 DoDD 1235.10, supra note 57. 60 Occasionally older cases, regulations, and instructions will reference former versions of these statutes and it is 

helpful to know the previous citations: In Title 10 of the U.S. Code, § 672(a) is now codified at § 12301(a); § 672(b) is 

now codified at § 12301(b); § 672(d) is now codified at § 12301(d); § 673 is now codified at § 12302; § 673(b) is now 

codified at § 12304; and § 3500 and § 8500 are now codified at § 12406. 

Chapter 10 

159 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

4. Invasions and Rebellions (10 U.S.C. A. § 12406) 

If the United States or any U.S. state or territory is invaded, or when: invasion is threatened by a 

foreign nation, there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the U.S. Government, or the 

President is unable to execute U.S. laws without active forces, the President can call the National 

Guard into federal service. Any orders for these purposes are to be issued through the governors of 

the states or the DC commanding general. 

5. Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C. A. § 331–335) 

a. 10 U.S.C. A. § 331 

If there is an insurrection in a state, the President, at request of state or legislature may call militia of 

other states into federal service as well as use the armed forces to suppress the insurrection. 

b. 10 U.S.C. A. § 332 

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages or 

rebellion against authority of United States makes it impracticable to enforce the law of the United 

States in any state or territory by judicial proceedings, the President may call into federal service 

such of the militia of any state and use such of the armed forces to enforce the laws or suppress the 

rebellion. (Such authority was exercised in Arkansas in 1957; Mississippi in 1962; Alabama in 

1963). 

c. 10 U.S.C. A. § 333 

The President can use the militia and/or the armed forces to suppress insurrection, domestic 

violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy if: (a) it so hinders the execution of law of that State 

and of the United States and it deprives citizens of constitutional rights (e.g. due process); or (b) it 

opposes or obstructs the execution of laws or impedes the course of justice. In the event of the 

deprivation of rights, the State is deemed to have denied its citizens equal protection of laws. 

6. 15-Day Involuntary Federal Active Duty (10 U.S.C. A. § 12301(b)) 

The Service Secretaries may order “units and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve 

as a unit” to a period of duty not to exceed 15 days (with the consent of the governor or DC 

commanding general for guardsmen). Reservists are ordered to active duty as units but may be 

reassigned thereafter. 

7. Voluntary Federal Active Duty (10 U.S.C. A. § 12301(d)) 

An individual can be ordered (by an authority designated by the Secretary concerned) to active duty 

with the consent of the individual (and with the consent of the governor or DC commanding general 

for guardsmen) for an unlimited period of time. 

8. Medical Care (10 U.S.C. A. § 12301(h)) 

Reservists may be ordered to AD for medical care, evaluation, or to complete a health care study. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 160 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

F. United States Coast Guard61 

Per 14 U.S.C. § 1, 14 U.S.C. § 2 and 10 U.S.C. § 101 (a)(4), the United States Coast Guard is 

designated as both an armed force and a federal law enforcement agency. The Coast Guard is the 

principal federal agency responsible for maritime safety, security, and stewardship. As such, the 

Coast Guard protects vital economic and security interests of the United States including the safety 

and security of the maritime public, our natural and economic resources, the global maritime 

transportation system, and the integrity of our maritime borders. The Coast Guard has eleven 

missions divided into two categories, homeland security and non-homeland security, pursuant to 

section 888 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-296 (6 U.S.C. § 468). 

The homeland security missions are: (1) port, waterways and coastal security; drug interdiction; 

migrant interdiction; defense readiness; and other law enforcement. 

The non-homeland security missions include: marine safety; search and rescue; aids to navigation; 

living marine resources; marine environmental protection; and ice operations. 

Due to the multi-mission nature of the Coast Guard, Coast Guardsmen performing a non-homeland 

security mission one moment, such as a trained and qualified marine safety inspector, could end up 

performing a homeland security mission by interdicting illegal drugs the next moment. 

The Coast Guard operates as part of the Department of Homeland Security. See 6 U.S.C. § 468. 

Presently, approximately 38,000 men and women serve on active duty in the Coast Guard. 62 

However, upon a declaration of war if Congress so directs in the declaration or when directed by the 

President, the Coast Guard will operate as a service in the Navy. When operating as a service in the 

Navy, the Coast Guard is subject to the orders of the Secretary of the Navy who may order changes 

in Coast Guard operations to render them uniform with Navy operations. See 14 U.S.C. § 3. The 

Coast Guard operated as a component of the Navy in World War I and World War II. Both the 

Coast Guard and Navy are authorized to exchange resources and information at all times. The 

Coast Guard receives equipment, armament, and training support from the Navy while providing 

the Navy vessels, personnel, and equipment during contingencies and special naval operations. 

Occasionally, some are confused about the Coast Guard’s authority to operate as an armed force. 

Some observers have assumed that the Coast Guard must switch from a Title 14 status to a Title 10 

status when acting as an armed force of the United States, perhaps believing it is like the National 

Guard which changes from a state to a federal status depending on the mission. The Coast Guard 

is at all times an “armed force” and “law enforcement agency” under Title 10 and Title 14. Put 

another way, the Coast Guard does not switch “hats” between a military service/armed force and a 

law enforcement agency—it performs both functions at all times. 

61 Additional details about the history, unique missions, capabilities, and authorities of the Coast Guard are available in 

Coast Guard Publication 1 (1 May 2009) available at the Maritime Operations web portal at the CLAMO website: 

https://www.jagcnet.army.mil/8525751D00557EFF. 62 See U.S. COAST GUARD, Careers, http://www.uscg.mil/top/careers.asp (last visited Jul. 6, 2011) [hereinafter CG 

Stats]. 

Chapter 10 

161 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

As discussed earlier in this chapter, the Coast Guard has a reserve component. Presently, 

approximately 8,000 Coast Guardsmen comprise the Coast Guard Reserve.63 

Finally, the Coast Guard Auxiliary is a civilian volunteer service, but one that is specifically 

authorized to “assist the Coast Guard, as authorized by the Commandant, in performing any Coast 

Guard function, power, duty, role, mission, or operation authorized by law. See 14 U.S.C. § 822. 

The Coast Guard Auxiliary assists both the active duty and the reserve components of the Coast 

Guard in search and rescue assistance missions, environmental protection, marine safety, boater 

safety education programs, and patrolling regatta and marine events. 

Unique to the Coast Guard as an armed force, the Coast Guard is authorized by 14 U.S.C. § 141 to 

use its personnel and equipment to assist any federal or state agency, to include DoD, when the 

Coast Guard assistance sought is assistance that the Coast Guard personnel or facilities are 

especially qualified to provide. Thus, Coast Guard units can be attached to DoD without the entire 

Coast Guard being fully absorbed into the Navy under 14 U.S.C. § 3. In addition, 14 U.S.C. § 141 

allows the Coast Guard to accept the assistance of any federal agency in the performance of any 

Coast Guard function. This unique assistance authority makes the Coast Guard a powerful partner 

in domestic contingency and other operations. 

Because the Coast Guard is at all times a federal law enforcement agency and an armed force of the 

United States, the Coast Guard has legal authority to conduct both Maritime Homeland Security 

Law Enforcement (MHS) and Maritime Homeland Defense (MHD) depending on the 

circumstances. Coast Guard units conducting maritime homeland security operations could find 

themselves in a maritime homeland defense situation in a matter of minutes. The ability to handle 

evolving scenarios as a federal law enforcement agency or an armed force is a unique characteristic 

of the Coast Guard. 

MHS is a federal law enforcement mission carried out by domestic law enforcement authorities, 

including the Coast Guard.64 The mission is to protect the U.S. Maritime Domain and the U.S. 

Marine Transportation System (MTS) and deny their use and exploitation by terrorists as a means 

for attacks on U.S. territory, population, and critical infrastructure. As the lead federal agency for 

MHS, the Coast Guard engages in maritime surveillance, reconnaissance, tracking, and interdiction 

of threats to the security of the United States, as well as responding to the consequences of such 

threats. Armed and uniformed Coast Guard law enforcement operations ashore are limited to 

activities at waterfront facilities, public and commercial structures adjacent to the marine 

environment, and, to the extent necessary to protect life and property, in transit ashore between such 

facilities or structures. 

In the event of a threat or incident requiring the exercise of national self-defense, DoD, acting 

through U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) and supported by other agencies, would take 

the lead in carrying out MHD operations, which involves the protection of U.S. territory, domestic 

population, and critical infrastructure. 

63 See CG Stats, supra note 62. 64 The Coast Guard is required to perform MHS law enforcement duties in support of the Ports and Waterways Safety 

Act, the Espionage Act of 1917, the Magnuson Act of 1950, 33 C.F.R. Part 6, Homeland Security Presidential Directive 

5 (HSPD-5), the National Security Strategy of the United States of America, the National Strategy for Homeland 

Security, and The Coast Guard Maritime Strategy for Homeland Security. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 162 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

G. National Guard of the Several States 

1. Overview 

Each state code and or constitution authorizes its state or territory to have a militia. The definition 

of “militia” in the United States Code includes both the organized and the unorganized militia; the 

National Guard, along with the Naval Militia, is considered the organized militia.65 In the 

Constitution, POTUS is the Commander in Chief of the militia only when it is “called into actual 

service of the United States.”66 This section discusses the National Guard when it is under the 

control of the governor, i.e., Title 32 status and State Active Duty (SAD). In a state status, 

Guardsmen are subject to the military code of the respective state to which they belong.67 

Each of the states and territories has an Adjutant General (TAG) or equivalent (e.g., Commanding 

General for District of Columbia), a state officer whose rank may or may not be federally 

recognized.68 The TAG/governor (depending on state law) is the Commander in Chief of the state 

military unless it is federalized; at which time that TAG loses command and control.69 (POTUS is 

Commander in Chief of the District of Columbia.) In the fifty states, District of Columbia, Virgin 

Islands, and Puerto Rico, there are 88 Air Force wings in the ANG and 8 divisions, 15 enhanced 

brigades, and 6 other major units in the ARNG throughout the states. 

Currently, each state has a joint headquarters, State JFHQs, to provide command and control to its 

ANG and ARNG; this concept was approved by Chief, NGB in October 2003. The State JFHQs 

currently operate as provisional organizations pursuant to NGB Memorandum 10-5/38-101 until the 

Joint Staff approval cycle has been completed approving the Joint Table of Distribution. The joint 

HQs will replace the STARCs and ANG Headquarters in each state and any other joint headquarters 

currently existing in the states. 

2. Title 32 Status 

When performing duty pursuant to Title 32, U.S. Code, a National Guard member is under the 

command and control of the state but paid with federal funds. The majority of ARNG Soldiers are 

traditional Guard personnel, sometimes referred to as “M-Day (Mobilization Day) Guardsmen” 

because of the weekend drills of inactive duty training (IDT) and annual training (AT). Each year, 

such NG Soldiers are required to perform 48 IDT drills and 15 days of AT. The operations of NG 

units in Title 32 status are controlled by the individual states, supplemented by funding from federal 

sources pursuant to federal regulations.70 Federal recognition of NG units and associated funding is 

conditioned upon the unit continuing to meet applicable federal standards.71 ARNG and ANG 

65 10 U.S.C. § 311. 

66 U.S. CONST. art. II, § 2, cl. 1.
 67 Pursuant to 32 U.S.C. § 327, the President or active duty commanders may convene state courts-martial. Moreover, 

in 2003, Congress ordered the preparation of a model state code of military justice. 

68 The U.S. President is the Commander in Chief of the National Guard of the District of Columbia. See Exec. Order
 

No. 11485 (3 Oct. 2001) and Title 39, District of Columbia Code. 

69 32 U.S.C. § 325. 

70 Illinois National Guard v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 854 F.2d 1396, 1398 (D.C. Cir. 1988).
 71 32 U.S.C. §§ 107–109.
 

Chapter 10 

163 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Soldiers performing duty in Title 32 status have Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) coverage as long 

as they are acting within the scope of their federal employment. 

Although there are many instances of the National Guard performing operations in a Title 32 status 

(i.e., airport security duty, counter-drug program, WMD-CST teams), it is the current position of 

OSD that such operations are unauthorized unless there is specific congressional or presidential 

authority for such operations. Nevertheless, the performance of many HLS missions in a Title 32 

status, instead of a Title 10 status, may be preferable because the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) does 

not apply; National Guard troops can respond more rapidly because they are in the local area; 

National Guard troops have more situational awareness in domestic areas than their active duty 

counterparts; and Title 10 activations result in National Guard loss of control over a state manpower 

pool depriving them of flexibility. Furthermore, HLS missions can enhance National Guard 

training by “training by doing.” The concept of allowing Title 32 operations has continually been 

suggested by studies such as the Hart-Rudman Commission and the recent Defense Science Board 

just to name a few. Moreover, various legislative proposals have been advanced to modify Title 

32.72 

Thus, NG personnel in a Title 32 status should not provide military support to civil authorities 

(MSCA), such as disaster assistance, unless such missions receive funding and authority.73 National 

Guard members should be in a State Active Duty (SAD) status (funded by the state) to perform 

those functions. If TAGs approve such services to governors when NG troops are in a Title 32 

status, the state may be required to reimburse the federal government for the inappropriate use of 

NG pay and allowances for these personnel. 

3. State Active Duty 

Only the National Guard has a status entitled State Active Duty (SAD); such duty is performed 

pursuant to state constitutions and statutes.74 It has no relationship to USAR/USAFR or Active 

Duty (AD). In a SAD status, NG personnel are controlled by their individual state, subject to the 

command and control of the respective governor and Adjutant General. National Guard units 

perform duties authorized by state law, such as responding to emergencies or natural disasters 

(floods, hurricanes, fires), and are paid with state funds. Because National Guard units are subject 

to state control unless “federalized,” they generally respond to local emergencies, such as civil 

disturbances, before active forces. For these types of operations, the governor will ordinarily 

proclaim an emergency and order a unit or units to SAD. Specific legislation governs the use of RC 

forces (NG and USAR) in domestic emergencies.75 DoD funds are not obligated for any personnel 

or units performing SAD. However, if the President declares an emergency after a request by a 

72 For example, H.R. 2073/S. 215, called “Guaranteeing a United and Resolute Defense Act of 2003,” sets forth a 

mechanism that allows centralized federal funding and decentralized execution of National Guard homeland security 

missions, with state command and control by funding HLS missions by the guard that are performed pursuant to state 

plans similar to those submitted pursuant to 32 U.S.C. § 112 for the counter-drug program. 

73 Any “duty,” other than that authorized by specific statutes, that is performed in a Title 32 status should constitute 

some sort of training because of fiscal considerations. 31 U.S.C. § 1301.
 74 For example, Arizona Constitution, art. 5, sec. 3; A.R.S. § 26-101 (governor as commander-in-chief of state military 

forces when not in federal service), A.R.S. § 26-121 (composition of militia); A.R.S. § 26-172 (mobilization of militia
 

for emergencies and when necessary to protect life and property).
 75 10 U.S.C. § 12301. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 164 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

governor under the Stafford Act, the state military department may be reimbursed through FEMA 

for the SAD pay and allowances it has expended.76 

4. ANG/ARNG Personnel Categories 

On any given day in a particular state, members of the National Guard are in different personnel 

categories: state employees, federal technicians, AGRs, ADSW, and part-time traditional guard 

members. 

a. AGRs 

Every guard unit has AGRs, full-time National Guard members under 32 U.S.C. 502. 10 U.S.C. A. 

§ 101(d)(6)(a) defines “active Guard and Reserve duty” as “active duty” or “full-time National 

Guard duty” for a period of 180 consecutive days or more for the purpose of “organizing, 

administering, recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve components.”77 AGRs receive 

essentially the same benefits and pay as their active duty counterparts of the same rank. Although 

they are required to perform drills with their units, they do not receive additional pay to do so. They 

can also be “activated” and placed into a Title 10 status.78 

b. Title 5 NG Federal Technicians 

Every guard unit has Title 5 federal technicians; excepted NG military technicians are unique to the 

NG.79 Technicians are federal civilian employees under the exclusive control of a state official, the 

Adjutant General who hires, fires, and supervises them. NG technicians must maintain three 

affiliations. In terms of their employment pursuant to 32 U.S.C. § 709, they are military technicians 

(“excepted service” civilian employees) as defined in 10 U.S.C. § 10216 during the normal 

workweek.80 Second, these military technicians must also maintain membership in a state NG. 

Third, they must also maintain federal recognition in the grade for their position as members of 

ARNGUS/ANGUS.81 Loss of NG membership terminates the full-time technician position.82 

In some states, NG technicians are members of collective bargaining agreements. Their civilian job 

positions are tied to their military rank and they wear military uniforms to work. When they 

perform drills and other training, they are in a Title 32 status just like traditional guard members. 

These members are also subject to “activation” into a Title 10 status and can also be called to 

perform “state active duty.” 

76 42 U.S.C. § 5121. 77 See also U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 135-18, THE ACTIVE GUARD RESERVE (AGR) PROGRAM (10 Dec. 2003); 

NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, REG. 600-5, THE ACTIVE GUARD/RESERVE PROGRAM, TITLE 32 FULL-TIME NATIONAL 

GUARD DUTY (FTNGD) (30 Feb. 1990); and AIR FORCE NATIONAL GUARD, INSTR. 36-101, THE ACTIVE 

GUARD/RESERVE PROGRAM (3 May 2002). 78 For a good discussion of FTNGD status, see United States ex rel. Karr v. Castle, 746 F. Supp. 1231, 1237 (Del. 

1990). 

79 32 U.S.C § 709. 80 See Lopez v. Louisiana National Guard, 733 F. Supp. 1059, 1065 (E.D. La. 1990).
 

81 10 U.S.C. § 101(c)(3), (5). 

82 NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, REG. 635-100, TERMINATION OF APPOINTMENT AND WITHDRAWAL OF FEDERAL 

RECOGNITION, ch. 6 (8 Sep. 1978).
 

Chapter 10 

165 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

In their civilian “excepted service” capacity, NG technicians are responsible for the maintenance of 

equipment and training and maintain employment in state headquarters, air defense, civil defense, 

and aircraft operations and are covered under the Federal Tort Claims Act. In their civilian 

capacity, their participation in domestic support operations is limited because any participation must 

fall within the position description for the particular job the NG technician performs. Otherwise, 

the NG technician will be placed in a leave status and placed on SAD orders. 

However, NG technicians also have the responsibility to train and perform general military duties 

with their unit and to be available to enter active federal service when their units are activated. In 

many cases, state headquarters principal staff officers also serve as technicians. Because their 

technician and NG roles are very similar, these staff officers play extremely important leadership 

roles in domestic support operations in their non-technician status.83 

c. ADOS84 

If funding is available, NG units can place National Guardsmen (whether traditional or federal 

technicians) on extended duty orders (as little as a day to as much as a year) to perform particular 

functions. These orders should not be confused with the requirements of Guardsmen to perform 

“training” (usually 15 days per year). Most Guardsmen that participate in the counter-drug program 

are on ADOS orders. These members are also subject to “activation” into a Title 10 status and can 

also be called to perform “state active duty.” 

d. State Civilian Employees 

In addition to military technicians, the state NG units employ civilians pursuant to “Master 

Cooperative” agreements. These personnel are authorized to use vehicles, property, and equipment 

provided to the ARNG by the federal government to accomplish their duties under the master 

cooperative agreement. Many guard units employ state employees in security and in civil 

engineering. These employees may or may not be members of the National Guard of that state; in 

other words, membership in the National Guard is not a condition of their employment as it is with 

Title 5 federal technicians discussed above. State employment should never be confused with SAD. 

e. “Traditional” Guard Members 

The majority of Guardsmen at a unit are “traditional” members. In other words, they hold civilian 

jobs in the community and are only in a military status when performing drills or other training 

(usually 15 days per year) or military duty. These members are subject to “activation” into a Title 

10 status and can also be called to perform “state active duty.” 

As noted above, each member of the National Guard can be placed into several different personnel 

categories (without being in more than one at a time). These categories are important when 

determining, among other things, benefits, discipline, and immunities. 

83 32 U.S.C. § 709. 84 Active duty for operational support – previously described in Section D.2.a., above. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 166 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

5. Unique HLS/HLD missions 

a. Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)/Civil Support Teams (CST)85 

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 12310(c), these National Guard teams support emergency preparedness 

programs to prepare for or to respond to any emergency involving the use of a weapon of mass 

destruction. These DoD certified teams are state controlled because they perform duty pursuant to 

32 U.S.C. § 502(f) although their missions are congressionally mandated. The teams are trained to 

support (they are not first responders) civil authorities at a CBRNE site by identifying the 

agents/substances, advising on responses, and otherwise assisting with requests for state support. 

Currently there are 32 teams, with 23 more pending identification and certification (in March 2004, 

pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY04, DoD identified 12 more states to 

receive these teams). By statute, the WMD/CST teams may not operate OCONUS although a study 

may be initiated to determine the benefits and drawbacks of OCONUS missions. 

b. National Guard Enhanced Response Force Package (NG-CERFP) 

Currently twelve states are establishing regional task forces called NG-CERFP that will use existing 

guard units and traditional (M-day) Soldiers to provide governors or a combatant commander with 

the capabilities to locate and extract victims from a contaminated area, patient and casualty 

decontamination, and medical triage and treatment.86 These response forces will provide support to 

civilian first responders or military authorities within the first 6 to 72 hours after a CBRNE event. 

These task forces are currently located in each FEMA region and will operate in SAD, Title 32 and 

Title 10 statuses. It is important for the judge advocate to know the deployed status of these forces 

in order to provide legal advice. For more detailed discussion areas, see below. 

6. Miscellaneous Areas of Caution 

a. Command and Control 

Pursuant to the Constitution, the militia is under the exclusive command and control of the governor 

unless and until “called into federal service” or otherwise federalized as a Reserve Component. 

Thus, federal status military officers cannot exercise command and control over state status 

National Guard members nor can state status National Guard members exercise command and 

control over federal troops.87 Two different statutes however, allow, under strictly prescribed 

circumstances, one officer to exercise command and control over both federal and state status troops 

although the authority is exercised in a mutually exclusive manner.88 

85 Originally these teams were known as Rapid Assessment and Detection teams (RAID). NDAA FY99. The May 

1997 Quadrennial Defense Review had recommended assigning chemical and biological counter-terrorism missions to 

the National Guard. 

86 The states establishing NG-CERFP’s are Hawaii, Washington, California, Colorado, Texas, Missouri, Illinois, 

Florida, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York and Massachusetts. 

87 See also Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334, 348 (1990). 88 Though not true military “command and control,” coordinating authority has been used by the USAF to allow a 

federal status officer to control federal and state forces. The concept works because one commander tells his forces to 

obey the orders of the other commander or risk discipline. The concept has been used while fighting wildfires and it has 

recently been accepted as Air Force doctrine as a method of promoting “unity of effort between Active, federalized Air 

Chapter 10 

167 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

The first statue, 10 U.S.C. § 315, allows regular members of the Army and Air Force to be detailed 

to duty with the National Guard and with the permission of the President and the consent of the 

governor, to accept a state commission.89 Although it has also been argued that 32 U.S.C. § 104(d) 

allows the President to detail Title 10 Guardsmen or Regular Air Force officers to command Title 

32 troops if the President details them, this detailing would not give the officer the ability to enforce 

his own orders unless he was also commissioned in that state’s national guard.90 

The second statutory basis is 32 U.S.C. § 325 as amended by the FY04 National Defense 

Authorization Act which allows a National Guard officer to serve in both a federal and state status 

while serving on active duty in command of a National Guard unit if the President authorizes such 

service in both duty statuses and the governor of his State or Territory or Puerto Rico, or the 

commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard, as the case may be, consents to 

such service in both duty statuses. This command option provides unity of command and effort and 

facilitates the maintenance of a common operating picture for both the federal and state military 

chains of command. 

A request to implement 32 U.S.C. § 325 could come from either DoD or the TAG of a particular 

state. Required implementing documents would be the Presidential authorization and the 

Gubernatorial consent to use 32 U.S.C. § 325, and a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between 

the two mutually exclusive federal and state military commands outlining the responsibilities and 

authority of the dual status commander.91 While the dual status commander may receive orders 

from two chains of command, those chains of command must recognize and respect that the dual 

status commander exercises all authority in a completely mutually exclusive manner, i.e., either in a 

federal or state status but never in both statuses at the same time. In a state status, this dual status 

commander takes orders from the governor through the Adjutant General of the State and may issue 

orders to National Guard forces serving in a state status. As a federal officer activated under Title 

10, the dual status commander takes orders from the President or those federal officers the President 

and Secretary of Defense have ordered to act on their behalf. The dual status commander, acting 

pursuant to his/her federal authority may issue orders only to federal forces. 

National Guard, Reserve, civilian, contract and Auxiliary Air Force personnel operating under Title 10 U.S. Code, and 

non-federalized Air National Guard forces operating under Title 32 U.S. Code or state active duty.” It must be noted 

that others contend that coordinating authority cannot be used during operations but only for planning, referencing the 

definition of coordinating authority in JP 1- 02, supra note 15. Many contend that a state status officer cannot use 

coordinating authority to supervise federal troops because of federal supremacy. 

89 A legal opinion of the Office of the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force, OpJAGAF 1998/20, 19 Feb. 1998, 

notes that state law will determine if a Title 10 officer who accepts such a commission may be placed in command of a 

non-federalized unit and notes that this would not be necessary for Title 10 Guardsmen in their own state. OpJAGAF 

1998/20, 19 Feb 1998, also states that active duty officers, or guard officers in a Title 10 status, placed in command of 

non-federalized Guard units will be subject to “two simultaneous chains of command,” a “situation that is neither 

legally precluded nor unusual.” 

90 32 U.S.C. § 104(d) does not allow such an action if it would “displace” a “commanding officer of a unit organized 

wholly with a state or territory.” OpJAGAF 1998/20, 19 Feb. 1998, opines that there would not be a displacement if the 

governor, or other state authority, of the affected state concurred with the detailing of the Regular Air Force officer. 

91 For example, the Utah Governor and CDRUSJFCOM executed an MOA for the Utah Olympics in 2002 (although 

the command relationship was not pursuant to 32 U.S.C. § 325). 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 168 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

b. State law 

State law provides the legal basis for the National Guard of each state and territorial entity. 

Moreover, state law provides the authority to perform missions, the basis for pay and benefits, rules 

for the use of force, liability and immunity rules, and military justice, just to name a few areas. 

Duty performed in a Title 32 status must also comply with federal laws and policies. Personnel in a 

Title 32 status also receive protections such as the Federal Tort Claims Act and other federal 

benefits.92 However, once a state has passed the Emergency Management Assistance Compact 

(EMAC), discussed below, state law is modified in conformity with EMAC, so missions conducted 

pursuant to its guidance are “exempted” from any contradictory state law provisions. Moreover, 

because Congress consented to EMAC, this compact is now federal law.93 

However, matters become more complicated when National Guard personnel cross state borders in 

a state status. It is then important to remember to examine the law of both the “originating state” 

and “receiving state.” For example, some state codes of military justice apply even when 

Guardsmen are performing duty in another state.94 Moreover, state law may dictate if and when 

non-federalized guard units may enter or leave a state for duty. For example, some states do not 

allow armed guard units to enter their state without permission from the governor or legislature.95 

Some states have specific authority that allows their militias to leave the state to perform duty.96 

A very important issue to consider is that of professional licensing. Military health professionals in 

a Title 10 status (physicians, dentists, clinical psychologists, nurses or others providing direct 

patient care), properly licensed pursuant to 10 U.SC. § 1094, can practice in any DoD facility, any 

civilian facility affiliated with DoD, or “any other location authorized by the Secretary of Defense” 

to include practice in a state, DC, or commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States 

regardless of where actually licensed.97 Arguably this directive also applies to Guardsmen who are 

in a Title 32 status. However, Guardsmen in a Title 32 status must also be acting within the scope 

of their employment to receive FTCA protections. Thus, an analysis of their authority to 

accomplish assigned tasks or duty is necessary. For example, federal law and directives allow Title 

10 personnel to provide medical treatment to civilians (not otherwise entitled to military medical 

care) during emergency situations.98 However, the Stafford Act does not provide that same 

authority to National Guardsmen in a state status.99 Thus it is unclear if Title 32 Guardsmen would 

receive FTCA coverage when treating civilians not otherwise entitled to military medical care. 

Moreover, if, as discussed earlier, National Guard personnel cannot perform operations in a Title 32 

status, it is possible that such “operational” activities will not be within the scope of employment. 

92 28 U.S.C. § 2671. Title 32 Guardsmen are also provided limited administrative remedies under the National Guard 

Claims Act, 32 U.S.C. § 715.
 93 A congressionally sanctioned interstate compact is a federal law subject to federal construction. New York v. Hill, 

528 U.S. 110, 111 (2000).
 94 See e.g., 44 OKL. ST. § 229. 

95 See e.g., KY CONST. § 225; MON. CONST., art. II, § 33; IDAHO CODE § 46-110; KAN. STAT.ANN. § 48-203. 96 See e.g., CONN. GEN. STAT. § 27-16; MISS. CODE ANN. § 33-7-7; NY CLS MIL § 22. 97 DoDD 6025.13 MEDICAL QUALITY ASSURANCE (MQA) IN THE MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM (MHS) (4 May 2004). 

98 E.g., 42 U.S.C. § 5121 et seq. 99 Although it would be within the scope of employment to provide military medical care to those entitled to such care. 

Chapter 10 

169 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Furthermore, a medical professional’s ability to practice medicine is based upon state authority. 

Because SAD military members are not “federal employees” under the FTCA, FTCA is not 

applicable to torts committed in this status. 

c. Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) 

This compact, which has become law in every state and territory, establishes immunities, 

authorities, and liabilities for missions executed under its authority. It allows the states to rely upon 

each other in responding to, among other things, emergencies such as man-made or natural 

disasters, insurgencies, or enemy attack. States can obtain reimbursement for support under this 

compact. Although Article VI of EMAC states that parties agree to recognize the licenses, 

certificates, or other permits issued by any other party to the compact for “professional, mechanical, 

or other skills,” some opine that this section does not extend to the authority to practice medicine 

because the medical credentialing process is not a license or permit. 

Article VIII of this compact states “Nothing in this compact shall authorize or permit the use of 

military force by the National Guard of a state at any place outside that state in any emergency for 

which the President is authorized by law to call into federal service the militia, or for any purpose 

for which the use of the Army or the Air Force would, in the absence of express statutory 

authorization, be prohibited under 18 U.S.C. sec. 1385.” Some read this provision as prohibiting 

the use of armed Guardsmen across state lines for EMAC missions. Others have opined that EMAC 

does not prohibit such activity, it merely does not “authorize” it within the scope of the compact and 

such authority would have to come through another agreement. 

d. “Hip-Pocket” Activation 

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 12301, 1st Air Force (a numbered Air Force in Air Combat Command) 

developed a process to instantaneously “federalize” Air National Guard (ANG) members who, upon 

the occurrence of a specified event, are called upon to perform North American Aerospace Defense 

Command (NORAD) missions. This process automatically converts consenting guard members 

into a Title 10 status upon the occurrence of a “triggering” event known in 1st AF as an “air 

sovereignty event.” On 11 June 2003, Secretary Roche delegated the authority “to order into 

federal service . . . those members of the Air National Guard who have volunteered to perform 

federal active service in furtherance of the federal mission” to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, 

who has the authority to re-delegate this authority to a MAJCOM Commander who can also redelegate his authority.100 This “hip pocket” process is now used for other Air Force missions. This 

process has been examined as a model for some Army missions, but at present is not applicable to 

any Army missions. 

e. Rules for the Use of Force (RUF) 

State law will govern the rules for the use of force for National Guardsmen in a state status. Thus 

state law must be followed when the rules for the use of force are drafted. In some states, National 

Guard forces have the same authority as peace officers, meaning that certain National Guard forces 

100 10 U.S.C. § 12301(d); Memorandum: Secretary of Air Force Delegation of Air National Guard Re-Call Authority, 

dated 11 June 2003; DoDD 1235.10, supra note 57. 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 170 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

in their home state may follow RUF established for peace officers within the state. A more detailed 

discussion of the RUF may be found in Chapters 11 and 12. 

H. Civil Air Patrol (CAP) 

The Civil Air Patrol, a volunteer organization, is a federally chartered nonprofit corporation under 

36 U.S.C. § 40301. It also functions as an auxiliary of the USAF in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 

9442.101 Although the CAP is not a military organization, as the USAF auxiliary it performs noncombat missions on behalf of DoD pursuant to statute and a Cooperative Agreement. The USAF 

provides policy and oversight of the CAP in its auxiliary status and can also provide personnel, 

logistical, and financial support and assistance. CAP missions are limited by internal and FAA 

regulations as well as by those statutes that restrict activities of military organizations (e.g. PCA). 

Missions accomplished by CAP in its auxiliary role normally include disaster relief, search and 

rescue and counter-drug, although changes to statutes, doctrine and policy are contemplated to 

better incorporate the CAP into the USNORTHCOM MACA force structure and thereby allow the 

CAP to become more active in a broader range of homeland security missions. 

The CAP is organized into eight geographical regions and performs three primary programs: 

Emergency Services (assisting federal, state, and local agencies), aerospace education, and cadet 

education. Although the USAF has overall responsibility for the CAP when it performs search and 

rescue missions, the USA provides oversight for disaster relief missions. 

Civil Air Patrol-United States Air Force (CAP-USAF) is located at Maxwell AFB in Montgomery, 

Alabama; an Air Force JA provides legal support to the Commander of CAP-USAF. 

I. Judge Advocates 

1. National Guard Judge Advocates 

The majority of the fifty-four National Guards have a single, full-time judge advocate, normally an 

AGR (Title 32) judge advocate, who may be either an ANG or ARNG judge advocate. The primary 

mission of the AGR judge advocate is to advise the TAG and, usually the USPFO. Both the Army 

and Air Headquarters in each state usually have a part-time headquarters judge advocate, although 

the creation of the new JFHQ-S in each state may change these assignments. 

ARNG and ANG legal personnel support both state and federal missions. Approximately fifty per 

cent of the ARNG judge advocates are assigned to SJA sections in combat support and combat 

service support units (CS/CSS). The remaining ARNG judge advocates are usually assigned to the 

state or territory headquarters. Other than the ANG HQ judge advocate, ANG judge advocates are 

located at the wing level in the state (usually two judge advocates and two paralegals per wing). 

ARNG and ANG judge advocates typically possess a broad range of experience and expertise, both 

military and civilian, and they can serve as effective liaisons with local and state governments 

because of their extensive local community contacts. The senior judge advocate for the ARNG is 

usually the POC for purposes of coordinating training and preparation for natural disasters, civil 

See also U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 10-2701, ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTION OF THE CIVIL AIR PATROL (29 

Jul. 2005, with Chg. 1, 29 Sep. 2006)); U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 10-2702, BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE CIVIL 

AIR PATROL (27 Feb. 2001), U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, PD 10-27, Civil Air Patrol (27 Feb. 2001). 

Chapter 10 

171 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 

101 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

disturbance, civilian assistance, and counterdrug missions within the respective state/territorial 

jurisdiction. The SJA of the ARNG combat or CS/CSS unit is the POC for legal training for the 

federal training/mobilization mission. 

As noted previously, each of the fifty states, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the District 

of Columbia, have their own distinct, independently commanded NG. Thus, the state judge 

advocate roles and missions will vary. Most states require their judge advocates to be a member of 

that state’s bar. 

2. U.S. Army Reserve Judge Advocates 

Army Reserve judge advocates are either embedded in USAR Table of Organization and Equipment 

(TOE) units or assigned to Judge Advocate General Service Organizations (JAGSOs). Unit judge 

advocates train to mobilize with their units and provide legal advice to the commander. USAR 

judge advocates are also found in several USAR Table of Distribution and Allowance (TDA) 

organizations such as the ten Regional Readiness Commands (RRCs). The mission of these judge 

advocates is to perform the traditional function of providing legal support to their respective 

command. 

JAGSOs are legal units that provide legal support to reserve personnel not otherwise provided the 

service or backfill for CONUS Army installations. One type of JAGSO, the Legal Support 

Organization, provides command and control over subordinate Legal Service Teams (LST) that 

provide legal support services. Legal Services Teams, organized on the basis of one Legal Service 

Team (LST) per 7,000 Soldiers, are functionally divided into three sections: the command opinions 

section, the client services section, and the litigation section. Several LSOs have primary missions 

to deploy outside the continental United States to provide legal support services in a particular 

geographical area. These LSOs are usually affiliated with a particular AC unit, and develop a 

repetitive training relationship. Other LSOs are designated as Mobilization Support Organizations 

(MSOs). MSOs become part of the CONUS support base and provide mobilization legal support at 

the Mobilization Stations. 

The Army Reserve also has IMAs/DIMAs that are assigned to specific Army organizations that 

augment legal services of that organization’s legal office. Army Reserve AGR judge advocates are 

on indefinite active duty status and assigned to various Joint, Active Army and USAR 

organizations.102 In USAR organizations, these judge advocates are usually responsible for day-today legal affairs. However, in other organizations they augment the active duty judge advocate 

office and coordinate USAR support. Although the judge advocate’s primary mission is to provide 

full-time legal support and USAR expertise, they also train, recruit, administer, and organize USAR 

forces assigned to their units. 

3. U.S. Air Force Reserve Judge Advocates 

USAFR judge advocates serve in either unit positions (Category A) or IMA positions (Category B). 

The Air Force JAG program is now a “Corps” rather than a department. As in the Army Reserves, 

there are USAFR AGR judge advocates assigned to Air Force and Air Force Reserve organizations 

to augment various missions. 

102 NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, REG. 600-10, ARNG TOUR PROGRAM (24 Feb. 1983). 

Chapter 10 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 172 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

The judge advocate reinforcement designee program is available for Guard and Reserve officers. 

These judge advocates are normally attached to the closest Air Force legal office to their homes and 

earn retirement points by performing non-pay IDT or completing ECI courses. 

4. U.S. Naval Reserve Judge Advocates 

Currently, there are over 440 Officer and 180 Enlisted billets in the United States Naval Reserve 

law program. Approximately two thirds of these billets are in 41 “Program 36” units directly 

supporting the Office of the Judge Advocate General Headquarters, Naval Legal Service Offices, 

Trial Service Offices, Trial Judiciary, Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, and Naval 

Justice School. The remaining billets, primarily staff JA or legal advisor billets, are in units outside 

of Program 36 or are independent duty assignments. These billets support various active 

component commands, including the major combatant commanders, other major shore and fleet 

commands, and Naval Construction (Seabee) units. In addition, there are over 100 Officers and 

Enlisted personnel drilling in Voluntary Training Units for retirement points only. 

5. U.S. Marine Reserve Legal Specialists 

The Marine Corps does not have a JAG Corps although the Marines are in the process of creating 

an over-arching judge advocate administrative organization. All legal specialists are line officers 

and fill billets that require a legal specialty as well as non-specialty billets. Commands own the 

legally oriented billets. 

6. U.S. Coast Guard Reserve Judge Advocates and Yeoman 

Like the Marine Corps, the Coast Guard does not have a JAG Corps. Accordingly, each Coast 

Guard judge advocate is a line officer with a “legal specialty.” The Coast Guard maintains Reserve 

judge advocates and Reserve yeomen. Each yeoman maintains qualifications as a legal technician 

and a paralegal. Coast Guard Reserve judge advocates and yeoman are typically assigned to 

support Coast Guard legal offices throughout the Coast Guard. 

Chapter 10 

173 Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Chapter 10
 

Reserve Components, CAP, and USCG 174
 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 11 

RULES FOR THE USE OF FORCE FOR FEDERAL FORCES 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1–3 (Executive, Commander in Chief, and Execution of the Laws 

Clauses, respectively). 

•	 U.S. CONST. amend. IV. 

•	 U.S. CONST. amend. V. 

•	 U.S. CONST. amend. VIII. 

•	 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335 - The Insurrection Act. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 12301. 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 242. 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 1385 - Posse Comitatus Act. 

•	 50 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq. - Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act. 

•	 Pub. L. No. 105-277, Section 101(h), as amended by Pub. L. No. 106-58, Title VI, Section 623, 

Sept. 29, 1999. 

•	 CJCSI 3121.01B - Standing Rules of Engagement/Standing Rules for the Use of Force for U.S. 

Forces, June 13, 2005. 

•	 AR 190-14, Carrying of Firearms and the Use of Force for Law Enforcement and Security 

Duties, March 12, 1993. 

•	 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Investigative Agency Policies, Resolution 14, Concerning 

the Use of Deadly Force, October 16, 1995. 

•	 FORSCOM Augmentation Forces to Designated AMC and ATEC Sites, 

•	 FORSCOM and USARC Force Protection OPORDs, 

•	 QRF/RRF RUF, 

•	 EXORD ISO Consequence Management Operations in New York City and Military District of 

Washington, 

•	 CJCS CONPLAN 0500-98, 

A. Introduction 

The Standing Rules for the Use of Force (SRUF) provide the operational guidance and establish 

fundamental policies and procedures governing actions taken by DoD forces performing civil 

support missions (e.g., military assistance to civil authorities and military support for civilian law 

enforcement agencies) and routine Service functions (including AT/FP) within the United States 

and its territories. It also applies to land-based homeland defense missions occurring within the 

United States and its territories. The SRUF also apply to DoD forces, civilians, and contractors 

performing law enforcement and security duties at all DoD installations worldwide, unless 

otherwise directed by the Secretary of Defense. The SRUF supersede CJCSI 3121.02, RUF for 

DoD Personnel Providing Support to Law Enforcement Agencies Conducting CD Operations in the 

United States, the rules for the use of force in the DoD Civil Disturbance Plan (Garden Plot) and the 

use of force guidance contained in DoD Directive 5210.56, Enclosure 2. 

The SRUF apply to Title 10 forces performing missions both for homeland defense and defense 

support to civil authorities. These rules do not apply to National Guard forces in either state active 

duty or Title 32 status. For information concerning National Guard rules for the use of force (RUF), 

Chapter 11 

175 RUF for Federal Forces
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

see Chapter 12, infra. Judge advocates should coordinate with their National Guard counterparts 

when operating in a joint environment to confirm the RUF the National Guard is using. 

Before beginning any discussion on the use of force in an operational setting, service members need 

to understand the legal, policy, and practical limitations for the use of force. The use of force for 

domestic mission accomplishment is constrained or limited by federal law and the Standing Rules 

for the Use of Force. 

While there are some very significant differences, the development, training, and application of the 

RUF and the ROE for overseas contingency operations can be similar.1

 The Standing Rules for the 

Use of Force provide the template for training RUF for domestic operations. Development of 

hypothetical scenarios will assist in posing the ultimate question of whether the service member 

may use force, up to and/or including deadly force. Often in training scenarios, the solution is not 

found in the applicable RUF but rather in the rules for when a service member can use force in selfdefense and identifying either a hostile act or demonstration of hostile intent. It is imperative to 

ensure commanders, as well as the service members who execute the commander’s plans, 

understand the potential limits on self-defense when operating as part of a unit. Unit commanders 

always retain the inherent right and obligation to exercise unit self-defense in response to a hostile 

act or demonstrated hostile intent. Unless otherwise directed by the unit commander, service 

members may exercise individual self-defense in response to a hostile act or demonstrated hostile 

intent. When individuals are assigned and acting as part of a unit, individual self-defense becomes 

a subset of unit self-defense and the unit commander may limit individual self-defense by members 

of the unit.2 

Use of force practice is one of the few areas in which the legal competence of the judge advocates 

can potentially have life or death consequences for service members and civilians. Therefore, it is 

imperative that judge advocates understand and apply legal and practical considerations when 

practicing in this area. This chapter will discuss the role of judge advocates in use of force, the 

practical realities involved in use of force incidents that are often not included in legal references, 

the legal standard for federal use of force, the existing Army policies on use of force, the potential 

legal liability involved in use of force, as well as other issues. This chapter should provide the 

reader with an introduction to use of force and its key legal references. 

B. The Judge Advocate’s Role in the Use of Force 

Judge advocates are called upon to practice domestic use of force law in routine legal duties as well 

as in domestic operations. The most common of these situations arises when judge advocates 

advise on force protection and installation law enforcement activities. Many judge advocates train 

service members on domestic operational RUF or use of force policies for law enforcement and 

security operations. Judge advocates advise units executing domestic operations, and will also 

advise or review investigations into incidents involving the use of force by a service members. 

Finally, judge advocates may be involved in civil or criminal proceedings for a use of force incident 

1

 For a comprehensive discussion on the development, training, and application of the ROE that can be applied to the 

RUF, see CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS, RULES OF ENGAGEMENT (ROE) HANDBOOK FOR JUDGE 

ADVOCATES (2000). 

2 See CJCSI 3121.01B at Enclosure L (U) – Standing Rules for the Use of Force for U.S. Forces (13 June 2005) 

[hereinafter SRUF], para. 4.a. 

Chapter 11 

RUF for Federal Forces 176 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

as a trial counsel, trial defense counsel, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, or as an attorney assisting 

in defensive federal litigation in his or her respective service. 

In drafting or reviewing RUF, judge advocates have to understand both the substantive law that 

governs Rules for the Use of Force, as well as the procedures necessary to modify the SRUF. 

Efforts to either augment or restrict the current SRUF must follow precise staffing requirements, 

and, in the case of augmentation, require advanced planning and should be initiated as soon as the 

need is identified.3

 In most cases, however, these RUF would already be staffed and implemented 

by judge advocates at higher echelons. 

Judge advocates performing all of these duties must know the controlling law for domestic use of 

force. For operations in areas subject to U.S. jurisdiction, the appropriate constitutional law 

standards as interpreted by the courts and the executive branch control. In addition, the policies or 

RUF issued by higher headquarters further define the legal requirements for use of force. In order 

to properly apply those policies or RUF, judge advocates must understand the underlying legal 

standards. 

RUF drafters involved in planning or executing a domestic operation should consider critical factors 

that are similar to those involved in Rules of Engagement. These factors include the following. 

•	 What are your command’s mission and your commander’s concept of the operation? 

•	 What type of unit is involved, what weapons and equipment, if any, will they deploy with, and 

what is the level of training for the domestic use of force with the assigned weapons? 

•	 What threat could your command face?4 

•	 What kind of interaction and exposure to the general public will your service members face? 

•	 What training resources are available for pre-deployment RUF training? 

•	 Does the training program properly address the issues involved with RUF or do training deficits 

set the conditions for misapplication of the rules with the potential for significant legal 

consequences for soldiers and the command? 

•	 Does the mission being planned nest well with the SRUF or should the local commander initiate 

a process to seek augmentation of the SRUF by submitting a request for a mission specific 

RUF?5 

3 See SRUF, supra note 2, para. 3.a.–3.b. and CJCSI 3121.01B at Enclosure P (U). The SRUF requires Combatant 

Commanders desiring to augment the SRUF to staff such actions through the CJCS to the Secretary of Defense for 

approval. Restrictions to the SRUF require notification although limited flexibility is provided for time critical 

situations. Enclosure P provides the template for requests for mission specific SRUF. 

4

 Judge advocates should base their draft SRUF and legal guidance on the worst feasible scenario. For example, a 

number of JAs have been assigned duties of advising on detention or migrant and refugee camp operations. In most 

cases, no one expected the detainees to violently riot. Unfortunately, rioting often occurs in extended detention 

operations. Structuring your SRUF assuming the detainees will passively comply will leave your security force without 

adequate guidance on how to respond to the emergency situation they will face in a riot. 5

 If such a need is identified, staffing of the request should be initiated using Enclosure P to CJCSI 3121.01B as a 

template. As this must be staffed to the Combatant Commander for staffing through the CJCS to the Secretary of 

Defense for Approval, it is imperative that this action be initiated upon the identification of the need. 

Chapter 11 

177 RUF for Federal Forces
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

C. Practical Realities of Use of Force Situations 

Judge advocates need to understand practical aspects of deadly force confrontations in order to be 

competent in use of force law. Understanding the law and policy of use of force is not enough. 

Judge advocates must recognize that the real world does not allow for dispassionate, reflective, and 

judicious decision making on whether to use force. Thus, judge advocates should consider a 

number of critical factors: what capabilities and limitations do service members bring to a potential 

deadly force confrontation; what should judge advocates know about potential attackers; and, what 

physical reactions will affect service members during and after use of force incidents? 

1. Capabilities and Limitations 

What capabilities and limitations do most service members bring to a life or death confrontation 

during a domestic operation? Let’s consider the service member’s equipment, training, and use of 

force knowledge. 

a. Soldier Equipment 

Compared to civilian law enforcement personnel, most service members are not as well-equipped 

for potential confrontations with belligerent and innocent civilians. When drafting RUF for a 

particular mission, commanders must decide if the mission requires service members to be issued 

firearms or other non-lethal weapons.6

 Further, if non-lethal weapons or non-standard weapons or 

ammunition are authorized for the mission, it is critical that soldiers be well-trained in the proper 

employment of these systems. 

b. Skill and Training for Confrontations 

Most service members do not receive extensive training on the types of skills and situations that are 

involved in confrontations in domestic operations. Because service members receive little training 

on tactical marksmanship and close quarters confrontations, they may not understand how to shoot 

accurately under stress or how to employ lesser means of force competently. Moreover, units 

generally do not conduct training emphasizing firearms engagements at closer than 10 yards, or on 

how to defend oneself using bare hands. Finally, service members trained on unarmed combatives,7 

must know which are deadly and which are non-deadly techniques. 

c. Training on RUF Law and Policy 

Many service members have not been trained on domestic law applicable to the use of force and, as 

a consequence, do not understand many of the policy requirements imposed by DoD and DA 

decisions.8

 Additional key concepts such as hostile act and hostile intent are often misapplied or 

used interchangeably. As such, it is critical that judge advocates understand the terminology and 

are capable of training these concepts in a straightforward manner. In addition, very few service 

6

 The Army’s use of force policy advocates arming Soldiers with non-lethal equipment such as military police batons, 

OC pepper spray, and military working dogs. 

7

 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, FIELD MANUAL FM 3-24.150, COMBATIVES (18 Dec. 2002). 

8

 Military police and special operations Soldiers are probably the only general population in the Army that routinely 

learn and understand these rules. 

Chapter 11 

RUF for Federal Forces 178 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

members receive training on the RUF or the legal and policy aspects of the investigations and 

litigation that may follow a use of force incident. This increases the challenge for judge advocates 

preparing units for domestic operations. 

The judge advocate must also consider the nature of the threat that our service members might face. 

Service members have to try to differentiate between aggressors employing various levels of force 

threats, those who do not present a direct threat but against whom force is authorized, and innocent 

civilians. 

An attacker will generally have the service member at a disadvantage. They will almost always 

have the initiative and sometimes they will have the element of surprise. One of the accepted 

principles of violent confrontations is that the attacker’s “action” will defeat a “reaction” of 

comparable speed by the service member.9 

2. Physical and Psychological Effects 

It is also imperative to keep in mind that the physical and psychological effects on the service 

member during a life or death situation can be critical. The stress of a life or death encounter will 

often trigger the “fight, flight, or freeze” response. Accompanying this, the body and mind undergo 

a number of changes that can affect performance. Judge advocates should research these reactions 

and consider their effects when drafting the RUF. They, and investigating officers, should also 

consider them when judging a service member’s reactions and statements in the aftermath of a 

shooting incident. 

D. Legal Authority and Standard for U.S. Military Use of Force in Domestic Operations 

The underlying legal authorities for use of force are grounded in the constitutional role of the 

Executive Branch, and tempered by the constitutionally protected civil rights as listed in the Bill of 

Rights. Against this backdrop, Congress has imposed a number of statutory provisions that help 

define and limit this authority. 

The competent use of force practitioner must understand these underlying authorities.10 This is 

similar to the duty of the competent SROE practitioner to understand the underlying public 

international law and law of war authorities affecting use of force by armed forces of the nationstate. Finally, the use of force practitioner and SROE practitioner must understand the differences 

between these two bodies of law and resist the temptation to confuse and meld terms and concepts 

from one to the other. 

All U.S. Army domestic use of force authority flows from the powers of the President as granted 

under the Constitution. The underlying authority of the President to order routine installation force 

9

 This concept is central to law enforcement use of force training theory. If an officer is faced with a deadly threat, the 

officer should not waste time considering whether other options will work. The immediate choice is whether the officer 

needs to use deadly force to save life or limb. This is why the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of 

Justice emphasize that the use of force policy that applies during a confrontation is essentially a question of whether it is 

objectively reasonable to use deadly force. If it is not, then the agent is free to consider other lesser alternatives. 10 Since domestic operations have generated very few reported cases involving service members, we must look to law 

enforcement cases to help define the limits of military use of force. 

Chapter 11 

179 RUF for Federal Forces
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

protection and law enforcement could be justified under the President’s executive powers.11 The 

authority to order the military to defend the homeland against overt international aggression can be 

clearly justified under his authority as the Commander in Chief.12 Finally, the President’s authority 

to order the military to execute DSCA operations (Defense Support of Civil Authorities)13 to 

enforce federal law has been based on the President’s duties to execute the laws.14 As officers of 

the Executive Branch, service members conduct operations and derive authority from the 

President’s Constitutional authorities.15 Similarly, whenever the military uses force to execute the 

orders of the President and those he appoints, that use of force must be based on constitutional 

authority. 

All Executive Branch uses of force are balanced against the civil rights of the public. While three 

primary provisions of the Bill of Rights limit federal use of force in domestic operations, the 

primary focus is on the Fourth Amendment.16 The constitutional standard is whether the use of 

force violated the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable seizures.17 The U.S. 

Supreme Court has described this standard as an objective measurement based on the facts and 

circumstances known to the service member at the time of the use of force.18 This rule is the very 

heart of the standard for governmental use of force. 

The “reasonableness” of a particular use of force must be judged from the 

perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of 

hindsight . . . . The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact 

that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments—in 

circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of 

force that is necessary in a particular situation. As in other Fourth Amendment 

contexts, however, the “reasonableness” inquiry in an excessive force case is an 

objective one: the question is whether the officers’ actions are “objectively 

reasonable” in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard 

to their underlying intent or motivation.19 

The courts have long recognized the authority to use force, including deadly force, in the 

performance of federal governmental duties.20 Judge advocates must know the limits of the mission 

and how the commander intends to execute this mission to advise on the RUF that support the 

operation. This makes the mission analysis portion of the planning critical. The phrasing of 

11 U.S. CONST., art. II, § 1. 12 Id. § 2. 13 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.12, MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR CIVILIAN DISTURBANCES (4 Feb. 1994). 14 U.S. CONST., art. II, § 3. 

15 See e.g., In Re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1 (1890). 16 The Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause limits the ability of federal officers to use force after an arrest has 

occurred. The Eighth Amendment defines the rights of a prisoner when corrections personnel use force. 

17 U.S. CONST., Amend. IV, provides that “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons...against unreasonable
 

searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . . .”
 18 Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 296 (1989). 

19 Id. (emphasis added).
 20 Neagle, 135 U.S. at 1.
 

Chapter 11 

RUF for Federal Forces 180 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Operations Orders or other directives that define the mission and operation are critical to defining 

the limits of this authority. 

There are a number of restrictions and decision points that the SRUF imposes on our service 

members or that are, in practical effect, introduced into RUF training. Judge advocates involved in 

drafting mission specific RUF should carefully consider where to balance the interests of force 

protection and the lives of service members against the important interest of not risking an 

excessive use of force incident involving the military. Further, judge advocates involved in the 

development of RUF training must be careful that the training does not introduce procedures that 

effectively restrict the SRUF or introduce tactically dangerous or unsound practices. 

Such errors can occur because judge advocates are mistaken in their understanding of the law or 

uncomfortable with the application of the RUF. Specifically, judge advocates should never apply 

Law of War to the domestic law on the use of force.21 Likewise, judge advocates should not 

confuse the law of individual self-defense of a private individual with the authority of self-defense 

for government officials.22 

1. Minimum Force Necessary or Deadly Force as a Last Resort 

The SRUF provides that, “Normally, force is to be used only as a last resort, and the force used 

should be the minimum necessary.”23 The SRUF further states that, “Deadly force is to be used 

only when all lesser means have failed or cannot be reasonably employed.”24 Lastly, the SRUF 

imposes a reasonableness requirement stating that the force used must be “reasonable in intensity, 

duration and magnitude” based on the totality of the circumstances to counter the threat.25 

Federal courts, however, do not require that service members employ “minimum force necessary” 

or that they employ deadly force as only a “last resort.” The courts have generally held that the 

issue is solely whether deadly force was reasonably necessary. They have declined to impose a 

requirement to use minimum force.26 Nor do courts require the use of feasible lesser force 

alternatives to avoid the use of justified deadly force.27 Judge advocates involved in planning 

domestic operations that carry a significant risk of potentially lethal encounters with armed or 

dangerous elements should evaluate whether the SRUF meets the task or whether mission specific 

21 As discussed above, the underlying substantive law applicable to domestic governmental use of force is the 

Constitution, not the Law of War. A common example is use of language of “proportionality of response” by a Soldier 

defending against an attack. 

22 While related, these legal standards are significantly different. A common example of this confusion is a 

requirement to retreat. Government officials using force in the performance of their duty have no duty to retreat and in 

some instances could be in breach of their duty if they do retreat. It is also possible to inadvertently lose the authority to 

use force under governmental authority by wording the RUF to invoke the law of individual right of self-defense of the 

state law or federal common law. For example, a provision that says, “Service members retain their right to use force in 

self-defense as defined by local and state law” reduces the service member’s right to use force in self-defense to the 

level of a private citizen under state law. This is a significant concession of otherwise lawful defensive authority. 23 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 5.b.1. 24 Id. para. 5.c. 25 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 5.b.1.
 

26 See e.g., O’Neal v. DeKalb County, Ga., 850 F.2d 653, 666 (11th Cir. 1988). 27 See e.g., Deering v. Reich, 183 F.3d 645, 652–53 (7th Cir. 1999). 

Chapter 11 

181 RUF for Federal Forces
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

RUF that more closely resembles the standards of case law should be developed and staffed for 

approval by the Secretary of Defense.28 

2. Mandatory Verbal Warnings 

Federal courts require service members to issue a verbal warning, where feasible, in the case of 

using deadly force against a fleeing criminal. This is clearly required in the seminal case of 

Tennessee v. Garner.

29 However, in defensive use of force there appears to be no such requirement 

in law. The SRUF does not require a verbal warning but does state that “[w]hen time and 

circumstances permit, the threatening force should be warned and given the opportunity to 

withdraw or cease threatening actions.30 Although the type of warning that should be given is not 

specifically established, it cannot take the form of a warning shot.31 

3. Denial of Deadly Force in Self-Defense 

Federal courts do not require that service members who are not armed in the course of their duties 

be denied the authority to use deadly force in their own defense. Some commanders and judge 

advocates believe that if there is no authority to arm service members, then there is no authority to 

use deadly force. This presumption is not imposed by federal law. In reference to self-defense, 

however, judge advocates must ensure that service members, acting as part of a unit, understand 

that the SRUF specifically provides that the individual right of self-defense may be restricted. This 

is rationalized by stating that when “individuals are assigned and acting as part of a unit, individual 

self-defense should be considered a subset of unit self-defense. As such, commanders may limit 

individual self-defense by members of their unit.”32 This is a controversial authority provided to 

commanders in the SRUF and would likely be challenged by a soldier being prosecuted either for 

violation of a lawful order or manslaughter.33 The SRUF also limits the use of deadly force to 

situations where lesser means have failed or cannot reasonably be employed. 

4. Operational Orders/Execution Orders 

For those operations that have not been thoroughly anticipated, judge advocates may find that the 

RUF are disseminated through message traffic with an OPORD or EXORD. Often judge advocates 

will have to wait for RUF guidance from higher headquarters because the decision of whether to 

draft new RUF or adopt an existing template is yet to be announced. 

28 Staffing of the request should be initiated using Enclosure P to CJCSI 3121.01B as a template. As this must be 

staffed to the Combatant Commander for staffing through the CJCS to the Secretary of Defense for approval; it is 

imperative that this staffing process be initiated upon the identification of the need. 

29 Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 11–12 (1985). Garner provides a three prong analysis under the Fourth 

Amendment for the evaluation of whether the use of deadly force is reasonable. These prongs include: whether there is 

probable cause to believe that the individual suspect is dangerous; whether the use of deadly force is necessary to 

prevent the suspect’s escape; and, whether, if feasible under the circumstances, a verbal warning was given. 30 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 5.a. 31 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 5.b(3). There are some limited exceptions to this restriction, but these exceptions are 

unlikely to be encountered by most U.S. Army personnel.
 32 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 4.a. 

33 For an excellent discussion of the historical development of the inherent right of self-defense and its modern
 

interpretation by American courts, see DAVID G. BOLGIANO, COMBAT SELF-DEFENSE 32–39 (2007). 

Chapter 11 

RUF for Federal Forces 182 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

5. SRUF Authority to Use Deadly Force 

In RUF, the authority to use deadly force exists for limited purposes. The SRUF provides uniform 

guidance on domestic use of force. It also provides a consistent training template to avoid the ad 

hoc approach previously used in domestic operations RUF practice. 

a. Inherent Right of Self-defense 

As discussed above, unit commanders always retain the inherent right and obligation to exercise 

unit self-defense in response to hostile acts or demonstrated hostile intent. Unless otherwise 

directed by the unit commander, service members may use deadly force when it appears reasonably 

necessary against a hostile act or demonstrated hostile intent. Individual self-defense is a subset of 

unit self-defense and as such may be limited by the unit commander when an individual service 

member is acting as part of a unit. Unit self-defense includes the defense of other DoD forces in the 

vicinity. 

b. Defense of Others 

The use of deadly force extends to the use of force to defend other non-DoD persons in limited 

circumstances. Service members may use deadly force in defense of non-DoD persons who 1) are 

in the vicinity, and 2) when the use of force is directly related to the assigned mission.34 

c. Protection of Assets Vital to National Security 

Service members may use deadly force when it appears reasonably necessary to prevent the actual 

theft or sabotage to assets vital to national security. The SRUF defines assets vital to national 

security as President-designated non-DoD and/or DoD property, the actual theft or sabotage of 

which the President determines would seriously jeopardize the fulfillment of a national defense 

mission and would create an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm.35 The SRUF 

provides a list of potential examples: nuclear assets, nuclear command and control facilities, other 

designated areas that contain sensitive codes or involve special access programs. Planners and 

commanders need to determine the existence of assets in their anticipated area of operations to 

apply the SRUF properly so as to safeguard these designated assets. 

d. Protection of Inherently Dangerous Property 

Service members may use deadly force when reasonably necessary to prevent the actual theft or 

sabotage of inherently dangerous property. The SRUF defines “inherently dangerous property” as 

property that, in the hands of an unauthorized individual, would create an imminent threat of death 

or serious bodily harm.36 Examples include portable missiles, rockets, arms, ammunition, 

explosives, chemical agents, and special nuclear material. On-scene DoD commanders are 

authorized to classify property as inherently dangerous.37 Command guidance in this area is 

critical. Without clear and proper guidance, the commander’s intent could easily be frustrated. For 

34 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 5.c.2. 35 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 4.f. 

36 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 4.f. 37 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 4.f. 

Chapter 11 

183 RUF for Federal Forces
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

example, a commander may not want to have lethal force deployed against looters who steal small 

arms ammunition. Failure to provide guidance on this could lead to an engagement that was proper 

under a strict reading of the SRUF but is inconsistent with the on-ground commander’s intent. 

Likewise, a commander may consider all crew-served weapons as “inherently dangerous,” but a 

failure to make such designations may lead to confusion over what is “inherently dangerous 

property” by Soldiers on the ground. 

e. National Critical Infrastructure 

Service members may use deadly force when reasonably necessary to prevent the sabotage of 

national critical infrastructure. National critical infrastructure for DoD purposes is Presidentdesignated public utilities, or similar critical infrastructure, vital to public health or safety, the 

damage to which the President determines would create an imminent threat of death or serious 

bodily injury. Commanders and planners need to identify the existence of such infrastructure when 

preparing for a domestic operation. 

6. Other Mission-Related Circumstances for Use of Deadly Force 

As with the circumstances described above, deadly force may be used, under limited circumstances, 

when directly related to the assigned mission. Further, such force may only be used “when all 

lesser means have failed or cannot reasonably be employed.”38 These additional circumstances, 

where such force may be used when directly related to the assigned mission, are discussed below. 

a. Prevention of Serious Crime against Persons 

Service members may use deadly force when it appears reasonably necessary to prevent a serious 

crime involving the threat of imminent death or serious bodily harm (hereinafter referred to in this 

chapter as “serious crime”). Examples of such crimes include murder, armed robbery, and 

aggravated assault. Further, attempting to set fire to an inhabited building or sniping would 

constitute offenses that involve the threat of imminent death. Serious crime is a critical term to the 

definition of a number of the following authorities to use deadly force.39 

b. Escape40 

Service members may use deadly force when it appears reasonably necessary to prevent the escape 

of a prisoner, provided there is probable cause to believe that the prisoner committed or attempted 

to commit a serious offense. Serious offense is defined as one that involves imminent threat of 

death or serious bodily harm or an offense that would pose an imminent threat of death or serious 

bodily harm to DoD forces or others in the vicinity. 

38 SRUF, supra note 2, paras. 5.c & 5.d. 

39 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 5.d.1. 40 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 5.d.2. 

Chapter 11 

RUF for Federal Forces 184 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

c. Arrest/Apprehension of Persons Believed to have Committed a Serious Offense41 

Service members may use deadly force when it appears reasonably necessary to arrest or apprehend 

a person who they have probable cause to believe has committed a serious offense as defined in 

paragraph b above. 

7. Augmentation of the RUF 

A unit commander that desires to augment the SRUF must staff the action to the appropriate 

Combatant Commander. The Combatant Commander must then staff the request through the CJCS 

to the Secretary of Defense for approval.42 Requests for augmentation must be prepared using the 

template provided at Enclosure P, RUF Messaging Process, to CJCSI 3121.01B. Unit commanders, 

however, may further restrict the SRUF without prior approval. However, if a restriction is 

implemented by a unit commander on a Secretary of Defense-approved RUF, the Secretary must be 

notified through the Joint Staff. When confronted with time critical situations, commanders can 

notify the CJCS and the Secretary of Defense concurrently, or if not possible, may notify the CJCS 

as soon as possible after the Secretary of Defense notification.43 

E. Liability for Service Members, Leaders, and RUF Drafters in Use of Force Situations 

Service members, their leaders, and the planners who draft the RUF for domestic operations face 

potential personal liability for any unlawful use of force by a service member during a domestic 

operation. This includes federal and state civil and criminal proceedings after an incident. In 

addition, such incidents are often accompanied by a variety of investigations that can result in 

adverse administrative consequences. Therefore, it is important that judge advocates consider this 

liability as they draft RUF, disseminate the RUF, and participate in training for and the execution of 

domestic operations under RUF. Failing to do so could unnecessarily expose service members to 

the financial and emotional burdens of litigation, even if the case is ultimately dismissed. 

1. Federal Civil Liability 

A person injured by a service member’s use of force could seek damages in a federal civil suit 

against the service member and others involved in the RUF. If the person is dead, the family 

members of the decedent could file the suit. This private cause of action for damages—caused by a 

service member’s use of force—is based on deprivation of a constitutional right. In most cases, this 

will involve the Fourth Amendment standard of objective reasonableness. The seminal case that 

created this cause of action is Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.

44 

In fact, one reported Supreme Court Bivens case involves an Army Soldier and use of force against 

a civilian.45 

41 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 5.d.3.
 42 SRUF, supra note 2, para 3.a. 43 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 3.b.
 

44 Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
 

45 See Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001). In Saucier, Katz attempted to unfurl a protest banner in close proximity to
 

Vice President Gore’s speaking stand on the Presidio of San Francisco. Katz brought a Bivens action against the 

Chapter 11 

185 RUF for Federal Forces
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Litigation is also conceivable in situations where force was not used and an innocent civilian is 

killed or injured as a result. A soldier’s decision not to use force, or a commander’s decision to 

limit the use of deadly force would most likely be found to be within the discretionary function 

defense to claims made under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).46 However, if the decision not 

to engage an otherwise lawful target was a result of a failure to train or the use of ill-conceived 

training materials, the U.S. Government could be found liable for negligence under the FTCA. 

While discretionary function is a closely guarded “silver bullet” defense, plaintiff’s counsel could 

use faulty or inadequate training as a basis to seek to establish negligence on the part of the U.S. 

Government. 

a. The Application of Qualified Immunity 

Judge advocates serving as advisors, investigators or litigators should understand that qualified 

immunity is a critical dispositive measure to forestall unnecessary burdens on the government and 

its representatives, and it can serve as a bar to trial. Recent caselaw provides guidance on how 

courts apply qualified immunity. 

Saucier v. Katz, a 2001 Supreme Court decision, is a noteworthy case in the context of military 

support to domestic operations. Saucier, a Military Police officer assigned to protect the Vice 

President, was accused by Katz of using excessive force. Pursuant to Bivens, Katz filed suit against 

Saucier on the grounds that Saucier had violated Katz’ Fourth Amendment rights. 

Pearson v. Callahan, a 2009 Supreme Court decision, is now the key case from which to analyze 

issues of qualified immunity.47 (Pearson involved an accusation of a Fourth Amendment violation 

for a warrantless search and seizure conducted by Utah state law enforcement officers.) 

For judge advocates vis-à-vis their roles as RUF practitioners, it is first necessary to understand the 

analysis handed down in Saucier as it may still be used by lower courts. In Saucier, the Court 

mandated a two-prong analysis to determine whether an official was entitled to qualified immunity. 

First, a court was required to decide: 1) “whether the facts alleged or shown by the plaintiff make 

out a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) if so, whether that right was ‘clearly established’ at 

the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.”48 This analysis was to be strictly applied and 

provided an analytical paradigm that often served to direct early disposition of cases in favor of the 

official without the need for extensive and costly pretrial discovery and litigation. 

In Pearson however, the Supreme Court effectively reversed its position in Saucier by holding that 

lower courts were no longer bound to the rigid two-prong analysis. The Court noted, however, that 

the Saucier case could still be used as an appropriate analytical paradigm by lower courts in their 

discretion, but that lower courts were no longer required to use the Saucier procedure.49 

military police that apprehended him. Katz alleged that the military police violated his Fourth Amendment rights by use
 

of excessive force in forcibly removing him from the immediate vicinity of the podium and in placing him into a van. 46 United States v. Gaubert, 499 U.S. 315 (1990). 47 Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009).
 

48 Saucier, 533 U.S. at 194.
 49 Pearson, 555 U.S. at 223. 

Chapter 11 

RUF for Federal Forces 186 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Accordingly, Saucier remains an important qualified immunity case. However, in light of Pearson 

and the difficulties lower courts have had with the Saucier analysis, it is uncertain how effective the 

analysis will be for those attempting to assert its procedure in establishing qualified immunity in the 

future. 

b. State and local government use of force cases are usually based on a civil cause of 

action created by 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

Section 1983 has evolved into an effective basis for citizens to seek damages for alleged violations 

of their rights by governmental organizations or their employees under the Fourteenth Amendment. 

Section 1983 liability has also been extended to apply to those who are involved in use of force 

policy and training decisions. These individuals have been found liable for civil damages if their 

decisions and work contributed to an improper use of force by an individual law enforcement or 

security person.50 As the SRUF specifically directs that commanders at all levels must train their 

subordinates on the use of both deadly and non-deadly force,51 failure to do so may expose 

commanders, their Soldiers, their advisors, and the U.S. Government to a host of legal 

consequences as discussed below. 

2. Federal Criminal Liability 

Service members could be held criminally liable for unconstitutional or illegal use of force before a 

court-martial, a federal district court, and in some cases, a state court. A federal statute prohibits 

use of force under the color of law that deprives any person of their constitutional or legal rights. 

Accordingly, DOJ has, in the past, investigated use of force during a domestic military operation 

with a view toward seeking a Grand Jury indictment for violation of this statute.52 

50 A supervisor who causes a constitutional violation by a “deliberate indifference” to constitutional standards in proper 

training for officers may be liable under a Section 1983 cause of action. City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 388–89
 

(1989). While agencies can be found liable for a lack of proper training on deadly force, agency officials have also been 

found liable for a lack of training on non-deadly force (Davis v. Mason County, 927 F.2d 1473, 1483 (9th Cir. 1991)) 

and for training conducted that was insufficient (e.g., Berry v. city of Detroit, 25 F.3d 1342, 1345 (6th Cir. 1994)). The 

judge advocate advising a commander on RUF for a domestic operation should compare the difference in effort and
 

attention to law between military RUF practice and the comparable efforts of federal law enforcement agencies. While 

Section 1983 may provide plaintiffs with a compensable claim after a use of force encounter as a result of a failure to
 

train, the FTCA could also provide a potential remedy when a training requirement existed and it was either not
 

accomplished or it can be demonstrated that the training was inadequate or failed to apply the proper standards. 

Ironically, it is conceivable that a third party that could have been covered under “defense of others” could attempt to
 

bring a claim under the FTCA if the individual could establish that the Government was negligent in its training of RUF
 

and it contributed to the injury suffered.
 51 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 1.b.
 52 For an excellent overview of the liability nightmare resulting from a Marine shooting that was authorized and proper 

under the Rules of Engagement for JTF-Six, see Lieutenant Colonel W.A. Stafford, How to Keep Military Personnel 

from Going to Jail for Doing the Right Thing: Jurisdiction, ROE & the Rules of Deadly Force, ARMY LAW., Nov.
 

2000, at 1.
 

Chapter 11 

187 RUF for Federal Forces
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

3. State Civil and Criminal Liability 

Federal Supremacy Clause Immunity will not always prevent a service member from having to face 

trial in state civil or criminal proceedings. In fact, in the “Ruby Ridge” use of force incident, a 

federal officer was not granted immunity from a state criminal proceeding for the shooting of a 

civilian involved in an armed confrontation with the FBI.53 

F. Other Trial or Litigation Issues 

Judge advocates involved in post-shooting procedures and litigation should consider a number of 

issues. First, be prepared to advise commanders on the many investigations that could occur. 

Second, be aware of the Army’s procedures on civilian litigation. Finally, know that service 

members have far less legal protection against use of force liability than a federal law enforcement 

agent. 

Judge advocates should know that if a service member kills or injures a civilian during a domestic 

operation, a number of agencies could initiate investigations of the incident that would affect both 

the service member and the Army. Commanders will probably recognize the fact that the various 

commanders involved, their parent services, any joint command, and the National Guard Bureau or 

State National Guard authorities, could initiate an administrative investigation and Rules for CourtsMartial (RCM) 303 inquiries.54 Commanders are often surprised to find that the following civilian 

investigations could occur. 

•	 An investigation by DOJ or the U.S. Attorney for potential federal civil or criminal disposition; 

•	 An investigation by state, county, or municipal law enforcement authorities for state criminal 

disposition; and 

•	 An administrative investigation by the Inspector General or internal investigative element of a 

federal law enforcement agency if the command was providing support to that federal agency. 

Judge advocates also need to know the procedures and considerations involved in potential civil 

litigation. Army Regulation 27-40, Litigation,55 Air Force Instruction 51-301, Civil Litigation,56 

Navy Instruction 5800.7D, and Manual of the Judge Advocate General (JAGMAN)57 outlines 

Service guidelines on issues such as whether a service member will be entitled to governmentprovided representation, investigation of potential litigation cases, whether the government will 

indemnify the service member for damages in civil cases, and the key points of contact when the 

Service may be involved in litigation. Further, Army Pamphlet 27-162, Claims Procedures,58 

53 State of Idaho v. Horiuchi, 215 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 2000). Interestingly, one of the critical factors in the Court’s 

analysis was the fact that a supervisor had published unlawful use of force guidance. This became an issue, even 

though Special Agent Horiuchi based his decision to shoot on the lawful pre-existing RUF, rather than the flawed rules 

published by his team commander. 

54 MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, UNITED STATES, R.C.M. 303 (2008). 

55 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 27-40, LITIGATION (19 Sep. 1994). 56 U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 51-301, CIVIL LITIGATION (1 Jul. 2002). 

57 U.S. DEP’T OF NAVY, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL INSTR. 5800.7D, MANUAL OF THE JUDGE 

ADVOCATE GENERAL (JAGMAN), para. 6020 (14 Mar. 2004). 58 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, PAM. 27-162, CLAIMS PROCEDURES (21 Mar. 2008). 

Chapter 11 

RUF for Federal Forces 188 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

provides guidance on the management of potential claims against the U.S. Government under a 

variety of theories and statutory authorities.59 

Finally, judge advocates need to recognize that service members and commanders involved in use 

of force incidents will probably have less legal and practical protection than their counterparts in 

federal law enforcement. Caselaw defining the role of service members using force during 

Homeland Security operations is extremely limited. Many of the cases interpreting governmental 

use of force have expressly or impliedly based their interpretations of the “reasonableness” of the 

force on the law enforcement status of the federal officers. These officers were qualified and 

credentialed law enforcement officers with clear statutory investigative jurisdiction and duties to 

uphold federal law and confront criminals. Service members performing non-traditional Homeland 

Security operations do not have the benefit of this well-defined caselaw. Judges could potentially 

decide cases of first impression involving service members less deferentially than they have for law 

enforcement officials. Finally, Congress does not extend immunity that is routinely applied to 

federal law enforcement to Army domestic operations.60 

G. Common Issues in Drafting and Training RUF 

During domestic operations planning and execution, judge advocates may draft, interpret, or 

conduct training on the RUF on short notice. In this atmosphere of crisis planning, judge advocates 

must carefully balance the interests of protecting the rights of the public against the force protection 

concerns of service members in potentially dangerous situations. Accordingly, striking the 

appropriate balance requires that judge advocates: understand the law and policies that shape this 

area of practice, including key Supreme Court decisions; have a basic understanding of both 

tactical engagements applying RUF; and consider the psychological and physiological responses of 

citizens confronted with a use of force scenario. 

1. Training of Judge Advocates 

Although RUF is rarely at the forefront of training for judge advocates, leaders should seek 

opportunities for their judge advocates to obtain basic training in the deployment of weapons in 

tactical engagements.61 If available, training with police or special forces elements can provide 

59 Claims have been paid in recent history for shootings by U.S. military personnel engaged in the performance of their 

duties. For example, in 1997 U.S. Marines were sent to support the U.S. Border Patrol in Texas along the Mexican 

border during a period of escalating border violence and drug related activity. Although the facts are disputed, a U.S. 

person of Hispanic ancestry was under observation by U.S. Marines. The Marines claimed that the individual under 

surveillance fired at them with a .22 caliber rifle that he had in his possession. The Marine claimed that he returned fire 

when fired upon and he killed the individual with one shot from his M-16 rifle. There was immediate controversy that 

surrounded the incident and the Navy agreed to settle the claim for an amount reported to be $1.3 million. See U.S. 

Settles with Family in Fatal Border Shooting, NY TIMES (August 12, 1998), 

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/12/us/national-news-briefs-us-settles-with-family-in-fatal-border-shooting.html (last 

visited Jul. 7, 2011). 

60 Congress, recognizing that the scope of duties for federal law enforcement officers does not extend to enforcing laws 

against simple assaults, homicides, and other types of violent crime, extended the scope of employment for federal 

officers having to use force to prevent such violent crimes. The language of this statute does not make it applicable to 

the majority of service members engaged in domestic operations. See Pub. L. 105-277, Section 101(h), as amended by 

Pub. L. No. 106-58, Title VI, sect. 623, Sept. 29, 1999, often referred to as the Federal Good Samaritan Statute. 61 Although the law that governs RUF is different than that which governs ROE, this training will assist judge 

advocates that are called to assist in the development or training of either RUF or ROE as an appreciation on the tactical 

Chapter 11 

189 RUF for Federal Forces
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

judge advocates with great insight into the challenges confronted by a soldier in a lethal force 

encounter. 

Ideally the training should include the study of executive, congressional, and judicial authorities and 

constraints on the use of force by government and military personnel, and tactical skills training 

using both lethal and non-lethal measures. Although training such as this is resource intensive and 

time consuming, it is difficult for judge advocates that have not been exposed to tactical scenarios 

involving the use of weapons to provide comprehensive advice and support to training the force. 

If resources or time do not permit “hands on” training, the development of scenario training packets 

can assist in developing a more nuanced appreciation for application of the RUF. Although 

scenario training that does not involve actual hands on experience cannot replicate the physiological 

and psychological responses associated with a tactical engagement, an analysis of likely scenarios 

done in conjunction with a robust discussion of controlling legal authority can help illuminate the 

challenges that will be faced by those who may be called to apply RUF. Further, these scenarios 

can be developed to highlight the challenges that often face RUF planners and drafters and thus 

improve upon their ability to draft, provide advice concerning, and train RUF. 

2. SRUF and Areas of Confusion and Concern 

Most RUF practitioners will be called to advise and train on either the SRUF or mission specific 

RUF crafted and approved by higher headquarters and the Secretary of Defense, respectively. RUF 

practitioners whether being asked to propose mission specific RUF, advise on existing RUF, or to 

train RUF need to be sensitive to several areas that often become the source of confusion or error. 

The following are discussed in greater detail, supra, but care must be undertaken to understand the 

interface of the following concepts with the SRUF. These include the concept of use of “minimum 

force,” the general prohibition on the use of warning shots by land forces, the use of warnings to 

include verbal warnings, and the introduction of restrictions that go beyond that required by the 

SRUF that may have the inadvertent effect of depriving a Soldier of otherwise valid defenses 

available to federal officers acting in their official capacities. Such restrictions could come from the 

imposition of additional preconditions to the use of force beyond that of “reasonable belief,” 

imposing a duty to retreat by inappropriately relying on state law as it relates to the use of force by 

private citizens, or by attempting to further restrict the right of self-defense. 

Another potential source of confusion can flow from an effort to reconcile portions of AR 190-14, 

Carrying of Firearms and Use of Force for Law Enforcement and Security Duties62 with the SRUF. 

The SRUF applies broadly both on and off installations and specifically provides that its provisions 

apply to “DoD forces, civilians and contractors performing law enforcement and security duties at 

all DoD Installations.”63 

use of small arms and other lethal and non-lethal weapons will improve a judge advocate’s ability to support the 

warfighter and the command significantly. 

62 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 190-14, CARRYING OF FIREARMS AND USE OF FORCE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
 

SECURITY DUTIES (12 Mar. 1993). 63 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 1.a. 

Chapter 11 

RUF for Federal Forces 190 
 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

However, AR 190-14, Chapter 3, was revised in 1993 to synchronize with the use of force guidance 

contained in DOD Directive 5210.56. Subsequently however, the use of force guidance contained 

in DoDD 5210.56 was specifically rescinded by the SRUF.64 As such, judge advocates advising in 

a variety of areas related to law enforcement and security missions to include the development of 

contractual provisions for contract security forces need to be aware of this disconnect between AR 

190-14 and the SRUF. When the provisions of the two cannot be reconciled, the SRUF would 

control as its provisions cannot be augmented without the approval of the Secretary of Defense and 

cannot be further restricted without providing notice to the same. 

64 SRUF, supra note 2, para. 1.b. 

Chapter 11 

191 RUF for Federal Forces
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Chapter 11
 

RUF for Federal Forces
 192
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 12 

RULES FOR THE USE OF FORCE FOR THE NATIONAL GUARD 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335 - The Insurrection Act. 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 1385 - The Posse Comitatus Act (PCA). 

•	 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346, 2671–2680 - The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). 

•	 32 U.S.C. § 502 - Required drills and field exercises. 

•	 National Guard Regulation 500-1/ANGI 10-8101 - National Guard Domestic Operations, June 

13, 2008. 

•	 Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC), Pub. L. No. 104-321, 110 Stat. 3877 

(1996). 

A. Introduction 

The National Guard, or organized militia, is a federally-recognized state1

 government entity, except 

when called or ordered2

 to federal active duty as an element of the National Guard of the United 

States.3

 The effect of this constitutionally-derived4 status is perhaps greatest in the rules for the use 

of force (RUF) for the National Guard.5 The policies of DoD and service regulations governing 

RUF apply to elements of that Department, but not to the National Guard when commanded by state 

authorities.6

 As a result, the law that is the basis for National Guard RUF is the criminal law of the 

1

 “State” as used here includes the fifty states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin 

Islands, all of which have National Guard organizations headed by an Adjutant General and governed by state law. For 

example, the District of Columbia National Guard is governed by D.C. Code Title 49. 

2

 Members of the National Guard are called to duty under 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–333 and are ordered to duty under 10 

U.S.C. §§ 12,301–12,304. 3 See Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334 (1990).
 4

 The National Guard derives its state status from the Militia Clauses of the U.S. Constitution. U.S. CONST., art. I, § 8,
 

cl. 15, 16.
 5

 The law forming the bases for the Rules for the Use of Force (RUF) by the National Guard is the general criminal law 

of the states. There is, therefore, no single term used to describe those rules as states have referred to them variously as
 

rules of engagement (ROE), rules for the use of force (RUF), rules on the use of force (ROUF), and rules of interaction
 

(ROI). “RUF,” as used in this chapter, is used as a generic term intended to distinguish those rules of the 54 National
 

Guard jurisdictions which are based upon the criminal laws of those individual jurisdictions. Compare this to either the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Standing Rules of Engagement (SROE), CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, INSTR.
 

3121.01B, STANDING RULES OF ENGAGEMENT/STANDING RULES FOR THE USE OF FORCE FOR U.S. FORCES (13 Jun. 

2005) [hereinafter SRUF]. 

6 See, e.g., U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.18, DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES (29 Dec. 2011), U.S. 

DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.12, MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR CIVIL DISTURBANCES (4 Feb. 1994);; U.S. DEP’T OF 

DEFENSE, DIR. 5210.56, USE OF DEADLY FORCE AND THE CARRYING OF FIREARMS BY DOD PERSONNEL ENGAGED IN 

LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SECURITY DUTIES (1 Nov. 2001, C1 24 Jan. 2002); and U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DIR. 

5525.5, DOD COOPERATION WITH CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS (15 Jan. 1986, C1 20 Dec. 1989), which 

apply to “the Military Departments.” U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 190-14, CARRYING OF FIREARMS AND USE OF FORCE 

FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SECURITIES DUTIES (3 Dec. 1993) applies to the “Army National Guard only when called 

or ordered to active duty in a federal status under the provisions of Title 10, U.S.C.” 

Chapter 12 

193 RUF for the National Guard 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

state in which a National Guard unit is performing the mission.7 It is the drafting and application of 

state National Guard RUF, derived from state law and National Guard Bureau policy,8

 that is the 

subject of this chapter.9 

B. RUF and State Criminal Laws 

1. State Law Applicable to Both Title 32 and SAD Statuses 

Most National Guard operations in support of civil authorities are in support of state civil 

authorities and are undertaken on a state-funded basis, usually referred to as “state active duty” 

(SAD).10 These types of operations include relief from natural disasters, quelling of or providing 

security during civil disturbances and assistance to civil authorities during other state emergencies, 

such as strikes at state institutions. The notable operational exceptions include National Special 

Security Events (NSSE) as discussed in Chapter 7,11 the 2001–2002 National Guard airport security 

mission (hereinafter airport security mission), the G8 summit, and the Democratic and Republican 

National Conventions of 2008.12 These operations were performed in Title 32 status.13 As 

7

 A more precise explanation, discussed in the text infra subparagraph C.2, is that the criminal law of the states applies 

to both members of the National Guard operating in a state status and to off-post operations (and in some instances, 

some on-post activities) of the active components of the U.S. armed forces (including the National Guard called or 

ordered to active federal service). See Lieutenant Colonel Wendy A. Stafford, How to Keep Military Personnel from 

Going to Jail for Doing the Right Thing: Jurisdiction, ROE & the Rules of Deadly Force, ARMY LAW, Nov. 2000, at 1. 

The active component, because of its federal mission, is however largely protected from the impact of state criminal law 

by the doctrine of federal Supremacy Clause immunity. Judicial opinions dealing with the application of that doctrine 

to the military are discussed in the text infra subparagraph C.2. 8

 National Guard Bureau policy states that use of force is governed by state law. See NATIONAL GUARD REGULATION 

500-1/ANGI 10-8101 - NATIONAL GUARD DOMESTIC OPERATIONS (13 JUN 08) [hereinafter NGR 500-1]. 9

 This chapter does not include consideration of state rules for the use of force applied as part of the National Guard 

counter-drug program, for that see infra Chapter 6. 

10 See generally DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 2105.28, NATIONAL GUARD JOINT FORCE HEADQUARTERS-STATE (NG 

JFHQS-STATE) (5 Jan. 2011). State active duty [SAD] is a status pursuant to state law only and is funded by the state, 

unlike the status in which the National Guard trains for its federal mission pursuant to Title 32 of the United States 

Code [Title 32 status], which is federally funded and regulated. The National Guard in an SAD status may, however, 

use certain federal equipment, subject to a requirement for reimbursement for that use. In SAD status, National Guard 

Bureau and Active Army regulations do not usually apply unless the state has adopted those regulations as a matter of 

state law; for more information, see Chapter 10. 11 For example, the National Guard provided security support for the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, Georgia, and 

the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah. 

12 The airport security mission was served as “other duty,” pursuant to 32 U.S.C. § 502(f). On September 27, 2001, the 

President made a request to all of the state Governors that they call their National Guard personnel to duty, to be paid 

for by the United States, according to a White House press release. Between four and five thousand National Guard 

personnel served at approximately 450 commercial airports around the United States in response to the President’s 

request. 

A mission conducted by New York National Guard personnel in a Title 32 status after the 9/11 terrorist attacks was 

armory security. See Transcript of After Action Review Conference, Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, State Area 

Command (STARC), New York Army National Guard, and the Center for Law and Military Operations, at 17–18 (17– 

18 May 2002) [hereinafter NYARNG Transcript] (on file with CLAMO). 

Not discussed in this chapter are National Guard operations performed in support of civil authorities while in a federal 

active duty status. 

13 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, NATIONAL GUARD REG. 350-1, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD TRAINING, para. 2-1a(9) (3 June 

1991) (providing that Title 32 status may be used by an Adjutant General for what would otherwise be a state (SAD) 

Chapter 12 

RUF for the National Guard 194 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

explained in detail in Chapter 10, both SAD and Title 32 statuses are non-federal statuses, to which 

state law applies.14 As such, it is the criminal law of the states hosting the events, i.e. the Olympics 

and the conventions; that governed the RUF; however, each state in which an airport was secured 

by National Guard personnel applied its own criminal law,15 and airport security missions were 

executed in nearly all of the 54 National Guard jurisdictions.16 Consequently, over 50 different 

RUF were used in the airport security mission. Although most RUF addressed similar subjects, the 

specific implementation of these subjects varied from state to state.17 Examples of state RUF 

referred to throughout this chapter are, unless otherwise indicated, the RUF of the airport security 

mission. 

2. Subjects for Inclusion in State RUF for the National Guard 

When the National Guard executes a Title 32 or SAD mission that utilizes RUF, the subjects 

appropriate for the RUF are derived from the mission operation plan or operation order [hereinafter 

OPLAN/OPORD].18 The RUF covers core state criminal law subjects such as the right of self 

defense, including the retreat doctrine, necessary warning, proportionality, and location issues, for 

instance the defender’s home or work place. The RUF should also address the right to carry and 

discharge firearms, the authority of National Guard personnel as peace officers, and the authority 

for apprehension, search, and seizure. Whether, and the extent to which, these basic RUF subjects 

are included in a given OPLAN/OPORD are mission-dependent decisions.19 

Appendix 12 includes a list of basic RUF subjects and subjects appropriate for National Guard law 

enforcement, law enforcement support, and security missions. Some of the basic and missiondependent RUF for law enforcement, law enforcement support, or security missions are discussed 

below. 

mission if the Adjutant General determines that the mission will provide a training benefit for National Guard personnel 

in their federal role). At least one state, New York, chose to exercise all or part of the airport security mission in SAD 

status. 

14 See supra Chapter 10, subparagraph B.1.a(1). However, this may not always be the case in federal use of force law
 

liability. For example, if National Guard personnel in a Title 32 or SAD status are inadvertently made subject to the 

orders and authority of a federal commander, they could be held to a use of force standard as defined by applicable
 

federal law.
 15 The 1996 Summer Games in Georgia and the 2002 Winter Games in Utah are two examples.
 16 Several of the 54 National Guard jurisdictions, such as the District of Columbia, did not have an airport within the 

jurisdiction of the Federal Aviation Administration, and therefore had no state mission (and no RUF) for that operation. 

In each of these Title 32 missions, the National Guard served under the command of National Guard officers in state 

status and was kept distinct from the command authority of any active Army federal support element. 17 In 2003, the Counterdrug and Operational Law Team of the Chief Counsel’s Office, National Guard Bureau, 

collected and reviewed virtually all of the state RUF used in the airport security mission. All these RUF are retained by
 

that office in both paper and electronic format. 

18 For a list of those subjects to be included in an operation plan or operation order (OPLAN/OPORDER) for civil
 

disturbance operations, see NGB Civil Disturbance Handbook, supra note 8, para. 5-3e.
 19 For example, if the mission includes the security of certain real property, then the right to search and seize and 

amount of force necessary to undertake the inspection of persons and personal property entering and leaving that 

location should be included in the OPLAN/OPORD or RUF. 

Chapter 12 

195 RUF for the National Guard 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

a. Subjects Appropriate for Inclusion in All RUF 

(1) RUF Change Authority 

An important element appropriate for virtually all state National Guard RUF is an explanation of the 

authority to modify the RUF. If Adjutants General have delegated that authority to subordinate 

commanders, then the RUF must clearly state which part(s) of the RUF may be changed, in what 

manner and by whom. If the RUF contain no delegation of authority, then either the Adjutant 

General or state level task force commander retains the authority. If authority to change the RUF is 

wholly denied, including the authority to further restrict the RUF, then that should also be made 

clear. 

(2) Right of Self-Defense 

Another element appropriate for inclusion in all RUF, even for unarmed security missions, is the 

right to exercise reasonable and necessary force in self defense.20 Mission analysis21 and state 

law22 will determine whether, as part of the general right of self defense, National Guard personnel 

will be armed. One of the early concerns for NYARNG JAs after the 11 September 2001 terrorist 

attacks was the authority of New York National Guard personnel to carry weapons. Under New 

York law “[p]ersons in the military service of the state of New York when duly authorized by 

regulation issued by the adjutant general” are authorized to carry firearms.23 Unfortunately, such 

regulations were not previously promulgated. Consequently, the judge advocates drafted 

Department of Military and Naval Affairs (DMNA) Regulation 27-13, Carrying of Firearms and 

Use of Force, which the Governor’s Counsel Office approved on 29 September 2001.24 

20 See SRUF, supra note 5. These documents provide that service members may exercise individual self-defense in
 

response to a hostile act or demonstrated hostile intent, except as limited by a commander as part of unit self-defense. 

The SRUF provide that a commander may place limits upon unit self-defense and, because individuals make up units, in 

that way limit the right of individual self-defense. Whether state National Guard RUF may, like paragraph 2 of the 

SRUF, deny the right of individual self-defense in some instances, is open to question, especially because many states 

have statutes applicable to all persons within the state, including National Guard personnel, providing for the right of 

self-defense. See, e.g., MONT. CODE ANN. § 45-3-102. It is likely, however, that National Guard commanders could 

lawfully place restrictions on the use, for self-defense purposes, of weapons issued by the National Guard. However, if
 

a weapon is issued for the purposes of mission accomplishment, it may make little tactical sense to deny the use of the
 

same weapon for purposes of individual self-defense.
 21 As used herein, “mission analysis” refers to the commander’s vision of the execution of the mission, a determination 

of the amount of force necessary for mission accomplishment, and a determination, in light of known factors such as
 

intelligence on the nature of the threat presented to state forces, of whether National Guard personnel could be the 

subject of any type of physical attack in executing the mission. 22 It is important to distinguish between the citizen’s individual right of self-defense from the right of a government 

official to use force in self-defense. The rights and duties for these two different legal theories are similar, but contain
 

critical differences. RUF drafters must decide which legal authority they wish to invoke, and then ensure that the 

description of this authority remains consistent. Ambiguities created by confusing the two authorities could lead to 

confusion on the part of Soldiers, leaders, and in post-incident litigation. Almost all of the topics listed in this section
 

will allow for different conduct by a Soldier acting in self-defense under the two theories. 23 N.Y. PENAL LAW § 265-20. 24 NYARNG Transcript, supra note 12, at 51. 

Chapter 12 

RUF for the National Guard 196 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

The RUF must also address such state law topics as the right to defend others,25 the duty to 

retreat,26 the use of deadly force to prevent escapes,27 the requirement or limit on the use of 

warnings before the employment of deadly force in self defense,28 the requirement for the use of 

proportionality,29 and whether the place where the right of self defense is exercised has legal 

implications.30 

(3) Special Orders 

Many RUF include discussion of issues not directly related to the use of force. These issues are 

called “special orders” and cover such matters as: training (including training scenarios), military 

bearing and appearance, immunity, standards of conduct and treatment of civilians, safety, handling 

news media, discussion of the mission with others, and handling of suspicious persons, vehicles, 

and activities. Usually, the state Adjutant General or the task force commander will decide whether 

to include them in the RUF or in the OPLAN/OPORD. 

b. Role of State Law in Determining RUF for Law Enforcement, Law Enforcement 

Support, and Security Missions 

There are certainly variations between the states in the National Guard’s authority to take actions 

requiring use of force in a law enforcement,31 law enforcement support,32or security operation. For 

example, some states by statute give the National Guard the full authority of peace officers.33 In 

other states, the National Guard has only those peace officer-type powers enjoyed by the population 

25 The right to defend others is frequently the subject of the same state statutes that provides for an individual’s right to 

defend him or herself. See, e.g., CONN. GEN. STAT. § 53a-19(a); COLO. REV. STAT. § 18-1-704(2).
 26 The laws of several states require the duty to retreat, so, for the airport security mission, those states included the 

duty in the RUF. See, e.g., Connecticut airport security mission RUF para. IIIC(b) and CONN. GEN. STAT. § 53a-19(b).
 27 For a detailed discussion of the Fourth Amendment aspects of this topic in the context of FBI RUF, see Harris v. 

Roderick, 126 F.3d 1189 (9th Cir. 1997). 

28 Many, if not most, states included the necessity for a warning (if possible) before resorting to the use of deadly force 

in the airport security mission RUF. 

29 Some state RUF used for the airport security mission specifically required that action taken in self-defense must be
 

proportional to the force used in the attack necessitating the defense. See airport security mission RUF of the states of 

Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Texas, Virginia, and Wyoming (on file with CLAMO). It is unclear whether this duty was 

imposed in the RUF as a result of a state law requirement, or whether it was an inadvertent carryover from the law of
 

war rule of proportionality that is reflected in the SROE. 

30 In some states, the right of self-defense is greater when exercised in the defender’s home or place of work. In those 

places there is often no duty to retreat. See, e.g., CONN. GEN. STAT. § 53a-19(b); N. D. CENT. CODE § 12.1-05-07. 

31 Because the Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (2006) [hereinafter PCA] does not apply to the National Guard 

when not in federal status or under federal control, there is no federal law prohibiting the National Guard from 

participating in direct law enforcement actions. Whether the National Guard forces of any state may otherwise 

participate in such actions therefore depends upon the law of the individual states. Concerning application of the PCA 

to the National Guard, see also text infra subparagraph C.2. 32 For the purposes of the National Guard, “law enforcement support” usually means assistance provided to civilian law 

enforcement agencies at their direction or request – a meaning which may differ for purposes of the PCA regarding 

federal military forces. 

33 For example, Arkansas law at ARK. CODE ANN. § 12-61-112(a) provides the following: 

(a) Whenever such forces or any part thereof shall be ordered out for service of any kind, they shall 

have all powers, duties, and immunities of peace officers of the State of Arkansas in addition to all 

powers, duties, and immunities now otherwise provided by law. 

Chapter 12 

197 RUF for the National Guard 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

at large.34 Still others provide that the National Guard has certain specific authorities in limited 

situations.35 Depending upon the state statutes, the National Guard’s authority to act as peace 

officers may apply to operations in a Title 32 status, SAD status, or both.36 Regardless, the 

National Guard judge advocate must participate in the effort to tailor the RUF to the particular 

mission, state law, and the policies of the state Adjutant General.37 See DOPLAW Handbook, 

Supp., App. 12-3, for an information paper discussing the impact of state criminal law on RUF. 

c. Subjects Appropriate for Inclusion in Law Enforcement, Law Enforcement 

Support, and Security Mission RUF 

(1) Use of Force and Level of Force Generally 

If the National Guard mission is law enforcement, law enforcement support, or security, the mission 

OPLAN/OPORD or its RUF must specify what type of government weapons, if any, may be used 

for mission accomplishment and self defense. How those weapons may be used, what law 

enforcement-type actions (such as search and seizure) must or may be taken, and the level of force 

that may be used should also be covered. If authority is not granted for any law enforcement-type 

action (such as search and seizure) under any circumstances for mission accomplishment, the RUF 

or mission OPLAN/OPORD should expressly deny the use of force for the specified purpose. 

Conversely, if National Guard personnel are allowed to take some law enforcement-type actions as 

a last resort, such as the power to detain and question and/or search persons only when civilian law 

enforcement personnel are unavailable or where National Guard personnel have been directed to do 

so by civilian law enforcement personnel, this should be stated. The RUF must also address the 

degree of force authorized for National Guard personnel in the execution of law enforcement-type 

actions for mission accomplishment, self defense, or both. 

34 See, e.g., Iowa RUF for the airport security mission “Task Force Freedom Flight - Airport Security Instructions,” 

para. 4 (on file with CLAMO), and its reliance, for the purposes of arrest of civilians committing crimes in the presence 

of National Guard personnel, on Iowa Code § 804.9, granting ordinary citizens the power of arrest; Nebraska Rules of 

Interaction (ROI) #02, 2 Oct. 2001, para. 7 (“You must apply the use of force rules that apply to a private citizen under 

state law”) (on file with CLAMO); and Use of Force and Arrest Powers of New York National Guard Soldiers, para. 5 

(“a National Guardsman’s power and authority under New York state law are the same as any other citizen”) (on file 

with CLAMO). When conducting SAD missions in the wake of the 11 Sept. 2001 terrorist attacks, the NYARNG had 

no greater power than the normal citizen regarding arrest authority. Although a New York State Emergency Act 

provided a mechanism for the NYARNG to be designated as peace officers, the provision was not used because the Act 

also required a lengthy training period. See NYARNG Transcript, supra note 12, at 52. 35 See, e.g., GA. CODE ANN. § 38-2-6–38-2-6.1. 36 For example, Ark. Code Ann. § 12-61-112 applies “Whenever” National Guard forces are ordered to “service of any
 

kind,” but Ga. Code Ann. § 38-2-6 to 38-2-6.1, when read in toto, provide that the Governor has the power “in case of 

invasion, disaster, insurrection, riot, breach of the peace, combination to oppose the enforcement of the law, or 

imminent danger thereof” to declare an emergency ordering the National Guard into “the active service of the state” and 

granting the National Guard the authority to “quell riots, insurrections, or a gross breach of the peace or to maintain 

order.”
 37 For the purposes of the airport security mission, some states adopted more restrictive RUF than state law allowed. 

See, e.g., Annex E Rules of Engagement (ROE), para. 2, as approved by Wisconsin Attorney General Doyle (4 Oct.
 

2001) (in which Wisconsin National Guard authorities explained that the effect of Wis. Stat. Ann. § 939.22(22) was to
 

grant National Guard personnel the authority of peace officers, but that the policy of the National Guard was to grant 

only those “specified tasks of the requesting civil authorities denoted by special operations orders”) (on file with 

CLAMO). 

Chapter 12 

RUF for the National Guard 198 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

For example, if a law enforcement support or security mission includes guarding buildings or real 

property, the RUF must address whether persons entering or leaving the property may be detained 

and questioned or searched by National Guard personnel. If detention, questioning and/or search 

are authorized, then the RUF must state whether and to what degree force may be used to enforce 

the action. 

Moreover, for missions that include guarding buildings or real property, the RUF must address 

whether force, up to and including deadly force, may be used to defend the property. Some airport 

security mission RUF, for instance, provided that deadly force could only be used to defend 

specially designated property.38 When this device is used, National Guard judge advocates must 

ensure that a statutory or other system exists for the designation of this property. 

(2) Definitions 

Definitions may be appropriate for inclusion in all RUF but they are particularly necessary in armed 

law enforcement, law enforcement support, or security operations. Using law enforcement-type 

terms that National Guard personnel may not be familiar with may create confusion and may have 

unintended consequences. Terms commonly defined include: deadly weapon; firearm; reasonable, 

necessary, or minimum force; peace officer; probable cause; reasonable suspicion; reasonable 

belief; deadly and non-deadly force; arrest (civilian or military term); apprehension; detention; 

property vital to public health or safety (or other similar phrase); forcible felony (when defense is 

predicated on commission of a forcible felony); hostile act; hostile intent; proportionality or 

proportional force; felony; and misdemeanor. Additional terms are included in Appendix 12. 

(3) Arming Orders 

If firearms or other weapons with the capability to kill or severely injure another will be issued, then 

the RUF should provide for positive control by experienced NCOs or officers. This control 

includes the employment of the firearms and ammunition or other weapons. One method is to 

specify how Soldiers will carry their weapons, ammunition, and other ancillary equipment. This 

control can be expressed through arming orders. Arming orders are a state of preparedness to use 

force. They should not be confused with the authority to use force once a Soldier is faced with a 

threat. Arming orders are typically written in a chart or matrix format, specifying where or how the 

weapons will be carried and where ammunition will be kept, including when and where loaded 

magazines should be carried and when rounds should be chambered. Use of weapons other than 

firearms should also be addressed if those weapons will be issued.39 Below is an example of 

arming orders used by the Indiana National Guard for the airport security mission. 

38 On the other hand, the NYARNG RUF did not allow the use of deadly force to protect property. Deadly force was 

only authorized in self-defense “if there was a threat of death or grievous bodily harm.” See NYARNG Transcript, 

supra note 12, at 70. 

39 Other weapons may include use of water, batons, pepper spray, or tasers (electric stun guns). In airport security 

mission RUF, some states began their use of force matrix at a much lower level than would usually be the case, such as 

with an unarmed Soldier or airman first attempting verbal persuasion, then using “unarmed defensive techniques,” then 

using non-deadly physical force to restrain the aggressor, then stating that a weapon would be drawn if the aggressor 

continued his or her aggression, then drawing and displaying the weapon, then stating that a round would be chambered, 

etc. Commanders using this technique must of course explain that in a true tactical situation, the command does not 

Chapter 12 

199 RUF for the National Guard 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Arming 

Order 

Rifle or 

Shotgun 

Pistol Baton Chamber Ammo Bayonet Weapon/ 

Safety 

AO-1 Sling Holster Belt Empty In Pouch Not 

issued ON 

AO-2 Port Holster Belt Empty In Pouch Not 

issued ON 

AO-3 Sling Holster Hand Empty In Pouch Not 

issued ON 

AO-4 Port Holster Hand Empty In Pouch Not 

issued ON 

AO-5 Port Holster Hand Empty In 

Weapon 

Not 

issued ON 

AO-6 Port In Hand Belt Locked & 

Loaded 

In 

Weapon 

Not 

issued ON* 

* Leave safety on until ready to fire 

(4) THREATCON Levels Matched to RUF 

Another method of control includes adjusting the readiness posture in relation to the threat 

condition,40 or THREATCON.41 One way to make RUF dependent upon THREATCON level is 

through use of arming orders in which the order number (condition of readiness of the firearm or 

other weapon) relates to the THREATCON in effect.42 

(5) Special Orders 

There are other subjects appropriate for inclusion in National Guard RUF for law enforcement, law 

enforcement support, or security missions that concern use of force. Subjects to consider include: 

the relationship of National Guard personnel to civilian law enforcement personnel,43 acting at the 

expect that each service members must always use each and every incremental increase in the use of force; in some 

instances it would be futile and could risk injury to do anything except for, drawing and firing a weapon. 

40 The THREATCON levels are ALPHA, BRAVO, CHARLEY, and DELTA. U.S. DEP’TS OF ARMY AND AIR FORCE, 

NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU PAM 190-1/AIR FORCE NATIONAL GUARD PAM 208-2, App. A (15 July 1986) [hereinafter 

NGBP 190-1/ANGP 208-2]. Note that this is different from the Force Protection Condition (FPCON) approach used by 

DoD and the Army. Army FPCONs are progressive levels of security measures implemented in response to threats 

facing DoD and Army personnel, information and critical resources. See U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 2000.12, DOD 

ANTITERRORRISM PROGRAM (18 Aug. 2003). 41 Texas Rules for the Use of Force for the airport security mission specifically relied on THREATCON levels. Other 

states providing for “levels” of threat or RUF for the purposes of the airport security mission were Arkansas and North 

Carolina. 

42 The THREATCON levels provided in NGBP 190-1/ANGP 208-2, supra note 40, provide for increased security 

measures depending on the particular THREATCON level then in effect. See id. App. A, paras. A-7–A-10. 43 In a mission supporting civil authorities, National Guard personnel are typically instructed to rely upon civilian law 

enforcement personnel to detain and question persons, conduct searches and seizures, and to apprehend offenders, and 

to take any of these steps themselves only when requested or directed by those civilian law enforcement personnel or 

only in the most exigent of other circumstances. See NGR 500-1, supra note 8; and, for the purposes of the airport 

security mission, 29 Sept. 2001 ARNG Airport Security Instructions, para. 2-1 [hereinafter ARNG Airport Security 

Instructions] (on file with CLAMO). See id. para. 3-6b, limiting the National Guard to a law enforcement support role 

during the airport security mission. 

Chapter 12
 

RUF for the National Guard 200
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

direction of civilian law enforcement,44 defense of others, pursuit of suspects, retention of 

evidence,45 use of restraints, reports of firearm discharge,46 or other use of deadly force, 

accountability of weapons and ammunition, and a prohibition against use of non-issued weapons 

and ammunition should be considered. 

C. Specific RUF Issues 

1. RUF in Interstate (Cross Border) Operations 

National Guard forces have for many years crossed state borders both for training in a Title 32 

status for their federal mission and for assisting neighboring states in SAD status. Naturally, for 

many of these operations, especially training missions, the units carry their organic weapons. In 

some states, however, state code or constitutions complicate this practice. For example, § 33 of the 

Montana Constitution provides that no “armed persons . . . shall be brought into this state for the 

preservation of the peace . . . except upon application of the legislature . . .” and § 431.011 of Texas 

Statutes provides that a “military force from another state . . . may not enter the state without the 

permission of the governor.” Statutes or constitutional provisions like these can impede the timely 

flow of National Guard forces from one state to another. 

Federal Supremacy Clause immunity47 may be a viable defense available to a National Guard force 

crossing a state border for federal training purposes in violation of a proscription like that in Texas 

statutes referred to above. If Federal Supremacy Clause immunity is successful in defense of a 

violation of state law, then State RUF would not appear to be an issue in cross-border operations 

(unless the RUF themselves are unconstitutional),48 except for those operations undertaken in an 

SAD status.49 

Cross-border operations by state National Guard units in an SAD status for the purposes of disaster 

relief or other state emergencies within a second state have typically been accomplished pursuant to 

the several disaster-related or “National Guard-only” interstate compacts.50 The latest adopted or 

44 Actions taken at the direction of federal personnel will help support the argument that National Guard members are 

shielded by federal Supremacy Clause immunity from state criminal charges. See text infra, subparagraph C.2.; also 

see, West Virginia v. Laing, 133 F. 887 (4th Cir. 1904) and James River Apartments, Inc. v. Federal Hous. Admin., 136 

F. Supp. 24 (D. Md. 1955), in which persons who otherwise had no federal or other governmental status were given 

federal Supremacy Clause immunity by judicial opinion because they acted at the behest of federal officials. Another 

benefit of taking law enforcement-type action only at the express request or direction of law enforcement personnel may 

be that National Guard members are in those cases provided with state immunity from civil or criminal prosecution. 

See, e.g., UTAH CODE ANN. § 76-2-404; CONN. GEN. STAT. § 53a-22(d)–(e). 45 DA Form 3316R (Detainee Turnover Record) may be used to inventory items taken from detainees. 

46 ARNG Airport Security Instruction, supra note 43, para. 3-17a(3), required that the discharge of firearms, among 

other matters, by National Guard personnel serving in that mission be reported to the National Guard Bureau as a 

serious incident. 

47 See text infra subparagraph C.2.
 48 For an example of unconstitutional RUF, see Harris v. Roderick, 126 F.3d 1189 (9th Cir. 1997).
 49 It is even more likely that an armed National Guard force would be seen as a threat if entering the state in an SAD 

status to control civil unrest than in a purely training mission under 32 U.S.C. § 502(f). Some MSCA missions
 

undertaken for state purposes may be counted as training; however, under NGR 350-1, supra note 13, para. 2-1a(9), and 

federal Supremacy Clause, immunity may be available to protect that mission or part of that mission.
 50 AMERICAN LAW SOURCE ON-LINE, United States – Interstate Compacts, http://www.lawsource.com/also/usa.cgi?usi 

(last visited Jul. 7, 2011) provides a significant listing of interstate compacts, including those of most direct concern to 

Chapter 12 

201 RUF for the National Guard 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

enacted of these compacts available for use in disaster relief or other state emergencies by the 

National Guard, and the one most recently approved by Congress, is the Emergency Management 

Assistance Compact (EMAC).51 All states now have codified the EMAC, most without change. 

Since its approval by Congress in 1996, many states have used EMAC for various state emergencies 

and the possibility of its use in situations where the use of force may be necessary is clearly great.52 

EMAC, like all congressionally-approved interstate compacts, is federal law.53 As such, it is 

applied in the same manner as other federal legislation.54 This position in the legal hierarchy 

provides a basis to overcome state constitutional provisions that would otherwise serve to prohibit 

the entry of National Guard members from other states.55 Further, peace officer powers granted by 

the requesting state’s statutes only to the National Guard forces of that state56 may be granted to the 

National Guard forces of the sending state by the use of one or more EMAC supplemental 

agreements.57 

Finally, National Guard judge advocates advising the State Adjutant General or Task Force 

commander for the sending and/or receiving state in cross-border law enforcement operations in a 

SAD or Title 32 status under EMAC should take note of Art. XIII (“Other Provisions”) of that 

the National Guard, the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC); the Interstate Civil Defense and 

Disaster Compact; the Interstate Emergency Management Compact; the Interstate Mutual Aid Compact; and the 

National Guard Mutual Assistance Compact. This on-line list includes neither the Massachusetts Compact with New 

York for Military Aid in an Emergency nor the New England States Emergency Military Aid Compact. 51 The Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) was approved by Congress in October of 1996, see PUB. 

L. NO. 104-321, 110 Stat. 3877 (1996) [hereinafter EMAC]. At the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, New York was not 

a member of the EMAC. New York did, however, have a 1951 Mutual Aid Compact with New Jersey, Vermont, and 

Massachusetts. A major issue was what state would have command and control over service members from other 

states. NYARNG Transcript, supra note 12, at 35-6. 52 The Emergency Management Assistance Compact Guidebook & Standard Operating Procedures manual of the 

National Emergency Management Association notes that EMAC has been used for several large-scale emergencies,
 

such as Hurricane Andrew, and notes that it was used in response to 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in
 

New York. MUNRO, DOUGLAS P., THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE COMPACT GUIDEBOOK & STANDARD 

OPERATING PROCEDURES (Diane Pub. Co., 1997) [hereinafter EMAC SOP manual]. 

53 See, e.g., Texas v. New Mexico, 462 U.S. 554 (1983). 54 See, e.g., Skamania County v. Woodall, 16 P.3d 701 (Wash. 2001). 55 The EMAC provides that a request by one party state for mutual aid from a second state is mandatory in that the 

request must be honored, subject only to the second state’s right to retain within that state those resources as are 

necessary for self protection. EMAC, supra note 56, art. IV, para.1. 56 See ARK. CODE ANN. § 12-61-112(a).
 57 The EMAC provides that the power of arrest is granted to the emergency forces of the sending state if that power is 

“specifically agreed to” by the receiving state. EMAC, supra note 51, art. IV, para. 2. If the statutes of the receiving 

state grant only the National Guard forces of that state the authority of a peace officer, that limitation might be 

overcome by providing for the expanded authority of those forces from the sending state into one or more 

supplementary agreements pursuant to EMAC Article VII. Including this authority in a supplemental agreement could 

overcome the limitations to a state’s own National Guard units because an agreement implementing an interstate 

compact that has been approved by Congress has been held also to have the force and effect of federal law. See Tahoe 

Reg’l Planning Agency v. McKay, 769 F.2d 534, 536 (9th Cir. 1985). A related issue is whether the executive branch 

emergency forces of two states whose legislative branches have granted no peace officer authority to either of their 

respective National Guard forces can nevertheless give themselves those powers and their supporting RUF by the 

inclusion of those powers in an EMAC Article VII supplementary agreement. 

Chapter 12 

RUF for the National Guard 202 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

compact.58 This provision is untested in the courts59 but its apparent intent is to apply the PCA to 

National Guard operations, by denying the use of EMAC to the National Guard60 in situations 

where the PCA would prevent the active components of the Army and Air Force from providing 

direct law enforcement services. Under most situations, this proscription will have little impact on 

National Guard cross border operations and the RUF because National Guard activities are usually 

limited to providing law enforcement support to civil authorities, rather than providing direct law 

enforcement service.61 National Guard judge advocates should be mindful of this limitation, 

however, so that if EMAC is relied upon for any aspect of a cross-border operation to which Art. 

XIII might apply, National Guard authorities will be advised appropriately. 

2. State Criminal Liability of National Guard Members for Use of Force 

Immunity from state criminal charges for wrongful use of force by National Guard personnel was a 

topic addressed by some National Guard RUF for the airport security mission.62 The subject is 

addressed here in the context of National Guard personnel on active duty for the purpose of federal 

domestic law enforcement support or federal security mission63 and both Title 32 status64 and SAD 

status for the purposes of a state emergency. As discussed at the beginning of this chapter, state 

criminal law and therefore state RUF apply to both missions in Title 32 and SAD statuses. The 

focus of criminal liability under state law while in federal active duty status or in a state status is on 

the doctrine of Federal Supremacy Clause immunity.65 

58 See EMAC, supra note 51, art. XIII (providing that “[n]othing in this compact shall authorize or permit the use of 

military force by the National Guard of a state at any place outside that state if any emergency for which the President is 

authorized by law to call into federal service the militia or for any purpose for which the use of the Army or Air Force 

would in the absence of express statutory authorization be prohibited under Section 1385 of title 18, United States 

Code”).
 59 Telephone Interview with Ms. Amy Hughes, Policy Analyst for the National Emergency Management Association 

(NEMA), Lexington, KY (June 2003), which administers the NEMA website and provides support for the 

administration of EMAC.
 60 In other words, not prohibiting the National Guard from crossing a state border in a particular case but only 

prohibiting the use of EMAC as the authority to do so, so that if another interstate compact exists upon which to rely, or
 

in the event that use of such a compact is considered unnecessary, the National Guard force may still cross the border in 

an SAD status for the purposes of an armed law enforcement mission.
 61 See NGR 500-1, supra note 8, para. 4-2. The National Guard instruction governing the airport security mission 

contemplated cross border operations but provided that National Guard forces were not to participate in law 

enforcement operations unless in exigent circumstances. ARNG Airport Security Mission Instruction, supra note 46, 

paras. 2-1e, 2-8.
 62 See, e.g., Airport security mission RUF for the states of Nevada, New Jersey, and New York (on file with CLAMO). 

63 Such as during the 2002–2003 Air Force security mission, in which approximately 8,100 Army National Guard
 

Soldiers were mobilized under 10 U.S.C. § 12302 for the purposes of providing security at U.S.A.F. and Air National 

Guard installations. 

64 This was the case in the airport security mission. 

65 Since National Guard Soldiers performing security duties may be subject to both criminal and civil liability based on
 

both state and federal law for use of force incidents, the concepts of federal Supremacy Clause immunity and 

governmental qualified immunity under both state and federal law will be critical. For simplicity, this discussion is 

limited to federal Supremacy Clause immunity. 

Chapter 12 

203 RUF for the National Guard 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

a. Active Duty Federal Mission 

Although the early history of the doctrine of Federal Supremacy Clause immunity66 began 

somewhat before the case was decided,67 the opinion of the Supreme Court in In Re Neagle, 135 

U.S. 1 (1890), is regarded as the seminal case establishing the theory that the employees of the 

United States cannot be limited, by prosecution under state criminal laws, by the states in their good 

faith, rightful, and proper execution of their federal duties. 

Mr. David Neagle, who served as a Deputy U.S. Marshal and bodyguard to Mr. Justice Stephen 

Field, then a sitting member of the U.S. Supreme Court, was charged with murder by the state of 

California after killing another individual, Mr. David Terry, whom Neagle thought was reaching for 

a weapon in an attempt to kill Mr. Justice Field. Neagle successfully argued that in killing Mr. 

Terry, he (Neagle) did no more than was required of him by his federal position as Deputy Marshal 

and bodyguard and that California should not be allowed to proceed in its prosecution lest that state 

by implication be allowed to control the proper execution of his federal duties. 

Since the Neagle case, the defense that proved so valuable to Mr. Neagle has been applied 

successfully numerous times in judicial opinions on behalf of federal employees and other persons 

carrying out federal missions, including federal military personnel carrying out federal military 

missions. Those federal active duty military defendants have successfully employed the “Neagle 

defense” of Federal Supremacy Clause immunity against state criminal charges for improper 

operations of a motor vehicle,68 defamation,69 assault,70 and murder in the course of guarding 

prisoners of the U.S. Army.71 There is no limitation expressed in any of those opinions as to the 

type or character of the state offense to which the doctrine might be applied on a service member’s 

behalf.72 

In only one reported military-related case has anything like federal military RUF been clearly the 

subject of a Federal Supremacy Clause defense to state criminal charges. In United States v. 

Lipsett, 156 F. 65 (W.D. Mich. 1907), a case involving the shooting of an innocent bystander by a 

military guard, the Court examined the manual of guard duty used for training guards assigned to 

military prisoners. The Court found that per the manual, the guard’s duty in response to an 

attempted escape was to first call for the escapee to halt, and if the escapee did not halt, to then fire 

upon the prisoner.73 In this case, based largely on the court’s understanding of the guard’s federal 

duties, the guard was acquitted of manslaughter. 

66 See U.S. CONST. art. VI, cl. 2 (Supremacy Clause). 67 A U.S. Supreme Court case predating Neagle is Tennessee v. Davis, 100 U.S. 257 (1880). 68 See Montana v. Christopher, 345 F. Supp. 60 (D. Mont. 1972) (operating a vehicle without lights); Commonwealth v. 

Thomas, 612 F. Supp. 14 (W.D. Pa. 1984) (violation of state weight limits).
 69 Howard v. Sikula, 627 F. Supp. 497 (S.D. Ohio 1986).
 70 See Lima v. Lawler, 63 F. Supp. 446 (E.D. Va. 1945); Commonwealth v. Johnson, 297 F.Supp. 877 (W.D. Pa. 1969). 71 See In re Fair, 100 F. 149 (C.C.D. Neb. 1900) and United States v. Lipsett, 156 F. 65 (W.D. Mich. 907). 

72 The only limitation is that the act in question be taken in good faith and that the act be truly necessary for the 

purposes of the federal mission. Thus, the defense has not been judicially applied in defense to state charges of
 

unintentional death where the particular maneuver of a government vehicle was not required by the federal military 

mission. See State v. Ivory, 906 F.2d 999 (4th Cir. 1990). 73 United States v. Lipsett, 156 F. 65 (W.D. Mich. 907). 

Chapter 12 

RUF for the National Guard 204 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

The only reported case found involving federal RUF is a non-military civil case involving the RUF 

used by the FBI in the shootings and standoff between alleged weapons trafficker Randy Weaver 

and the FBI at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992. In Harris v. Roderick, 126 F.3d 1189 (9th Cir. 1997), 

the Court held the “shoot any armed male” FBI RUF to have been overly broad and to have 

deprived the plaintiff of his constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. 

Thus, not only may a federal officer, in the performance of his duties unlawfully deny the victim his 

constitutional rights, but the RUF may be subject to the same Fourth Amendment constitutional 

standard as the actions of the federal officer or agent. 

b. Title 32 or SAD Status and Mission 

The beginning of this chapter discussed the holding of Perpich74 that National Guard personnel in a 

federal training or “other duty” status under 32 U.S.C. 502 are a state military force, and 

consequently, their RUF are derived from state criminal and civil law. Under this analysis, the best 

defenses to the possibility of a state criminal charge75 resulting from good faith compliance with 

state RUF include: 

•	 A state statute providing criminal immunity for National Guard personnel.76 

•	 An agreement with the State Attorney General (possibly at the time the state Attorney General 

gives any approval of the RUF77) that National Guard personnel will not be prosecuted 

criminally for good faith compliance with the National Guard RUF.78 

•	 Extension of the doctrine of Federal Supremacy Clause immunity to National Guard personnel 

if acting under federal control. 

The application of Federal Supremacy Clause immunity to a state military force may rest upon the 

accumulation of indicia of a federal mission such as: federally-funded orders, use of federal 

equipment, governance by federal regulations, execution of the mission on a federally-owned or 

governed facility, application of the state RUF through execution of supplemental agreements under 

EMAC,79 execution of the mission details at the direction of federal authorities such as Department 

of Homeland Security personnel, contracts or memoranda of agreement (MOAs) with federal 

officials, or orders to Title 32 duty at the request of federal government officials. Caselaw clearly 

74 Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334 (1990). 75 Of course, because the subject is the possibility of state criminal charges, there is no value to tort law “hold 

harmless” agreements or the possible application of both the Federal Tort Claims Act and state tort claims laws. 

76 New York, for example, has a statute that grants civil and criminal immunity to members of the New York National 

Guard ordered into active service of the state for “any act or acts done by them in the performance of their duty.” N.Y. 

PENAL LAW § 235. See also, NEV. REV. STAT. 412.154(1). In the case of the statutory immunity predicate for National 

Guard missions for which firearms are issued, the most basic statute providing for use of force may be a statute 

providing for immunity for the carrying of firearms. See, e.g., N.J. REV. STAT. § 2C: 39-6(1). 77 The ARNG airport security instruction required the National Guard RUF used for that mission be reviewed by the 

state Attorney General. ARNG Airport Security Instruction, supra note 46, para. 3-6a 78 This type of agreement would have to be predicated upon the approval of the National Guard RUF by the state 

Attorney General. It also must be based upon the Attorney General’s statutory or common law powers of supervision 

over county or district prosecutors; the more independent the local prosecutor, the less value of any agreement with the 

state Attorney General. Where local prosecutors are mostly independent, assurance can only come from the 

agreement(s) of the local prosecutor(s). 79 Thus making the supplemental agreement and the RUF contained therein a matter of federal law. See, e.g., Tahoe 

Regional Planning Agency v. McKay, 769 F.2d 534, 536 (9th Cir. 1985). 

Chapter 12 

205 RUF for the National Guard 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

indicates that Federal Supremacy Clause immunity should be applied to cases involving a federal 

mission whether or not the subject of that protection is a federal employee.80 

3. RUF in Mixed National Guard and Active Component Operations 

Given the doctrine of Federal Supremacy Clause immunity, federal active duty Soldiers have less 

reason to consider themselves bound by the exact restrictions of a state’s criminal law and more 

reason to follow the requirements of the SRUF than do National Guard personnel in Title 32 or 

SAD status. For this reason, in domestic law enforcement support or security operations involving 

both active component and National Guard judge advocates must pay close attention to the RUF if 

active duty and National Guard Soldiers have similar duties. The RUF applicable to National 

Guard personnel must respect state limitations on law enforcement-type activities by the National 

Guard (such as searches and seizures) and the use of force to support those activities.81 

D. ROLE OF THE NATIONAL GUARD JUDGE ADVOCATE 

1. Drafting RUF 

While RUF are an S-3/G-3 and commander responsibility, judge advocates should assist in drafting 

them. In addition, judge advocates should be directly involved in the production of RUF-related 

documents, such as information papers, memoranda of law, and memoranda of agreement with 

supported civil authorities.82 Some MOAs may contain hold harmless provisions83 which the judge 

advocates should review, negotiate, and advise upon. If the RUF used by the National Guard in a 

law enforcement, law enforcement support, or security mission refers the reader to, or adopts the 

RUF currently used by a state law enforcement agency, judge advocates must review the 

documents relied upon for the RUF. The documents should be carefully reviewed to ensure 

compatibility with Soldiers’ skills, training, capabilities, weapons, and mission. It may be 

necessary to add provisions specifically applicable to the National Guard. 

80 For cases in which defendants, who had no federal employee status, were subject to state criminal charges 

successfully argued the application of federal Supremacy Clause immunity based upon a federal mission, see, e.g., West 

Virginia v. Lang, 133 F. 887 (4th Cir. 1904) (member of U.S. Marshal’s posse made of ordinary citizens charged with 

murder); Connecticut v. Marra, 528 F. Supp. 381 (D. Conn. 1981) (informer cooperating with FBI charged with 

attempting to bribe a city policeman). 

81 This does not necessarily imply that state RUF will always be more restrictive than the SRUF. For example, in civil 

disturbance support operations in which NGR 500-1 applies, when federal equipment is used the RUF provides that 

deadly force may be used for the prevention of the destruction of “property vital to public health and safety” 

(undefined). See NGR 500-1, supra note 8, paras. 4-6 and 4-6b(3)(c). Some states followed this authorization for the 

purposes of the airport security operation, even though that operation was not a civil disturbance operation, but was an 

airline security operation. See, e.g., Missouri RUF for airport security mission (“Commander’s Guidance on Use of 

Force”), Force Continuum Deadly Force, para. 3c (on file with CLAMO). In contrast, the analogous provision of the 

draft SRUF, supra note 5, para. 5c(2), authorizes the use of deadly force to protect president-designated assets vital to 

national security, which by definition is property the theft or sabotage of which must create an “imminent threat of 

death or serious bodily harm.” 

82 The National Guard Bureau Instruction governing the airport security mission required that states execute 

memoranda of understanding or memoranda of agreement (MOU/MOA) with supported airports for missions longer 

than thirty days. See ARNG Airport Security Mission Instruction, supra note 46, para. 2-8a. 83 See, e.g., Memorandum of Understanding with the Kansas National Guard and supported airports, para. 11 (on file 

with CLAMO). 

Chapter 12 

RUF for the National Guard 206 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

2. Negotiating RUF with State Agencies 

Judge advocates will want to determine whether the RUF, MOA, OPLAN/OPORD, training 

documents, and other matters relating to the RUF are comprehensive, legally accurate, and well 

understood by the drafters and commanders. At times, other state officers or agencies, such as the 

Attorney General, district attorneys, or state law enforcement agencies may be involved in drafting 

or approving the RUF. In such cases, judge advocates may find it necessary to educate and 

negotiate issues that meld legal requirements with operational imperatives. For example, in New 

York after September 11th, New York Army National Guard judge advocates assisted in drafting 

the Governor’s airport security plan, including RUF. The plan and RUF were staffed through the 

Adjutant General and the Governor’s Counsel Office, and approved by the Governor on 29 

September 2001.84 

3. Providing Legal Advice on Liability 

Counseling decision makers on the legal requirements necessary to protect Soldiers from civil and 

criminal liability can be a complicated task. The primary focus of the judge advocate’s counseling 

will be the state Adjutant General; the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations; the Plans, Operations, 

and Training Officer; and the Task Force or other commanders. 

4. Training 

Judge advocates should seek opportunities to assist trainers responsible for ensuring that individual 

Soldiers learn and apply the correct standards for force. In this role, judge advocates can write or 

assist in writing information papers, training vignettes, and legal memoranda. Also, the use of a 

training certification process may be useful.85 

84 NYARNG Transcript, supra note 12, at 184. 

85 See, e.g., State of Nevada Military Department Legal Annex to Rules of Engagement, para. VI 10 and Rhode Island
 

Task Force Green Security Detail, App. A (Rules for the Use of Force) (copies on file with CLAMO). 

Chapter 12 

207 RUF for the National Guard 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Chapter 12
 

RUF for the National Guard 208
 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

CHAPTER 13 

FUNDING DOMESTIC SUPPORT OPERATIONS 

KEY REFERENCES: 

•	 18 U.S.C. § 1385 - Posse Comitatus Act. 

•	 10 U.S.C. §§ 371–382 - Military Support For Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies. 

•	 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–334 - Insurrection Act. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2012 - Innovative Readiness Training. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2551 - Equipment and other services: National Veterans’ Organizations. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2552 - Equipment and other services: American Red Cross. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2554 - Equipment and other services: Boy Scout Jamborees. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2555 - Equipment and services: Girl Scouts of America. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2556 - Equipment and services: Homeless. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2558 - Equipment and services: National Military Associations. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2562 - Prohibition on Transfer of construction of firefighting equipment in FMS. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2564 - Provision of Support for Certain Sporting Events. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2576 - Sale or Donation of Military Equipment. 

•	 10 U.S.C. § 2667 - Lease of DoD Property. 

•	 31 U.S.C. § 1535 - Economy Act. 

•	 31 U.S.C. § 3302 - Miscellaneous Receipts. 

•	 32 U.S.C. § 112 - Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. 

•	 42 U.S.C. § 5121, et seq., as amended - Stafford Act. 

•	 50 U.S.C. § 2311 - Response to Threats of Terrorist Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991, Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 1004 (as 

amended, Additional Support for Counter-Drug Activities). 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-139, § 8131 

(Emergency Response Fund, Defense). 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-208, § 5802 (Support 

to International Sporting Competitions - Defense). 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, Pub. L. No. 104-201, § 1031, (as 

amended, Authority to Provide Additional Support for Counter-Drug Activities of Mexico). 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-85, § 1033 

(Authority to provide Additional Support for Counter-Drug Activities of Peru and Colombia). 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-107, § 1021 

(Extension and Restatement of Authority to Provide Department of Defense Support for 

Counter-Drug Activities of other Governmental Agencies). 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-107, § 302. 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, Pub. L. No. 107-248, Title II 

Operation and Maintenance. 

•	 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year, 2009, Pub. L. No 110- 417, § 1022 

(Extension and Restatement of Authority to Provide Department of Defense Support for 

Counter-Drug Activities of other Governmental Agencies). 

•	 DoDD 1100.20 - Support and Services for Eligible Organizations and Activities Outside the 

Department of Defense, April 12, 2004. 

•	 DoDD 2000.15 - Support to Special Events, December 8, 2003. 

Chapter 13 

209 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 DoDD 3025.18 - Defense Support of Civil Authorities, December 29, 2010. 

•	 DoD 3025.1M - Manual for Civil Emergencies, June 94. 

•	 DoDD 3025.12 - Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances, February 4, 1994. 

•	 DoDD 5200.31E - Single Manager for DoD Military Working Dog Program, March 29, 2006. 

•	 DoDD 5525.5 - DoD Cooperation With Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, January 15, 1986 

(with Chg. 1, December 20, 1989). 

•	 DoD Financial Management Regulation (FMR) 7000.14-R, vol. 12, ch. 6. 

•	 NGR 500-1/ ANGI 10-8101 - Military Support to Civil Authorities, June 13, 2008. 

•	 NGB 500-2/ ANGI 10-801 - National Guard Counterdrug Support, August 29, 2008. 

•	 CJCSI 3710.01B, DoD Counterdrug Support, January 26, 2007. 

•	 AR 75-14/OPNAVINST 8027.1G/MCO 8027.1D/AFR 136-8 - Interservice Responsibilities for 

Explosive Ordinance Disposal, February 14, 1992. 

•	 AR 75-15 - Responsibilities and Procedures for Explosive Ordinance Disposal, February 22, 

2005. 

•	 AR 190-12, Military Working Dogs, June 4, 2007. 

•	 AR 700-131, Loan and Lease of Army Material, August 23, 2004. 

•	 AR 725-1, Special Authorization and Procedures for Issues, Sales, and Loans, October 17, 2003. 

•	 SECNAVINST 5820.7C - Cooperation With Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, January 26, 

2006. 

•	 OPNAVINST 3440.16C - Navy Civil Emergency Management Program, March 10, 2005. 

•	 AFI 10-801 - Air Force Assistance to Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies, April 15, 1994. 

•	 AFI 10-802 - Military Support to Civil Authorities, April 19, 2002. 

•	 AFI 31-202 - Military Working Dog Program, May 16, 2009. 

•	 Commander Jim Winthrop, The Oklahoma City Bombing: Immediate Response Authority and 

Other Military Assistance to Civil Authority (MACA), ARMY LAWYER, July 1997 

A. Introduction: Basic Fiscal Law Framework 

The principles of federal appropriations law permeate all federal activity. Fiscal issues arise 

frequently during domestic operations, and the failure to understand fiscal nuances may lead to the 

improper expenditure of funds and administrative and/or criminal sanctions against those 

responsible for funding violations. There are several sources that define fund obligation and 

expenditure authority: (1) Title 10, U.S. Code; (2) Title 31, U.S. Code; (3) Department of Defense 

(DoD) appropriation acts; (4) DoD authorization acts; (5) agency regulations; (6) Department of 

Justice Office of Legal Counsel opinions; (7) Comptroller General decisions; and (8) other 

executive agencies’ authorities. 

Under the Constitution, Congress raises revenue and appropriates funds for federal agency 

operations and programs. See U.S. CONST., art. I, § 7. Courts interpret this constitutional authority 

to mean that Executive Branch officials, e.g., commanders and staff members, must find affirmative 

authority for the obligation and expenditure of appropriated funds.1 See, e.g., U.S. v. MacCollom, 

1

 An obligation arises when the government incurs a legal liability to pay for its requirements, e.g., supplies, services, 

or construction. For example, a contract award normally triggers a fiscal obligation. Commands also incur obligations 

when they obtain goods and services from other U.S. agencies or a host nation. An expenditure is an outlay of funds to 

satisfy a legal obligation. Both obligations and expenditures are critical fiscal events. See 31 U.S.C., § 1501. 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 210 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

426 U.S. 317, at 321 (1976) (“The established rule is that the expenditure of public funds is proper 

only when authorized by Congress, not that public funds may be expended unless prohibited by 

Congress.”) Likewise, in many cases, Congress has specifically limited the ability of the Executive 

Branch to obligate and expend funds, in annual authorization or appropriations acts or in permanent 

legislation. 

Because DoD functions primarily in a support role in domestic operations, most military assistance 

to civil authorities is provided on a reimbursable basis. In the case of some authorized activities 

such as counter-drug support, Congress annually appropriates money for DoD to provide support. 

For other authorized activities, Congress has established special “no year” accounts (such as the 

Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) and the Support for International Sporting 

Competitions (SISC) account) into which DoD can transfer part of its annual appropriation of 

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) funds. Once O&M funds are transferred into such an account, 

the funds are available for the same purposes and for the same time period as the appropriation to 

which transferred. In providing some types of support such as Military Assistance to Safety and 

Traffic (MAST), DoD has the authority to act directly and expend O&M funds. As a result of these 

various types of situations, it is important to understand that the purpose, time, and amount rules 

apply in domestic support operations. 

B. Basic Fiscal Controls 

Congress imposes fiscal controls through three basic mechanisms, each implemented by one or 

more statutes. The controls are as follows: (1) obligations and expenditures must be for a proper 

purpose; (2) obligations must occur within the time limits applicable to the appropriation (e.g., 

O&M funds are available for obligation for one fiscal year); and (3) obligations must be within the 

amounts authorized by Congress. 

1. Purpose 

Although each fiscal control is important, the “purpose” control is most likely to become an issue 

during military operations. The Purpose Statute provides that “[a]ppropriations shall be applied 

only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law.” 

See 31 U.S.C. § 1301(a). Thus, expenditures must be authorized by law (permanent legislation or 

annual appropriations act) or be “reasonably related” to the purpose of an appropriation. Judge 

advocates should ensure, therefore, that an expenditure fits an appropriation (or permanent statutory 

provision), or is for a purpose that is necessary and incident to the general purpose of an 

appropriation; the expenditure is not prohibited by law; and the expenditure is not provided for 

otherwise, i.e., it does not fall within the scope of some other appropriation. 

A corollary to the “purpose” control is the prohibition against augmentation. See Nonreimbursable 

Transfer of Admin. Law Judges, B-221585, 65 Comp. Gen. 635 (1986); cf. 31 U.S.C. § 1532 

(prohibiting transfers from one appropriation to another except as authorized by law). Appropriated 

funds designated for a general purpose may not be used for another purpose for which Congress has 

appropriated other funds. Secretary of the Navy, 20 Comp. Gen. 272 (1940). If two funds are 

equally available for a given purpose, an agency may elect to use either, but once the election is 

made, the agency must continue to charge the same fund. See Funding for Army Repair Projects, 

Comp. Gen. B-272191, Nov. 4, 1997, 97-2 CPD P141. This concept is known legally as the 

“election doctrine,” and the election is binding even after the chosen appropriation is exhausted. 

Chapter 13 

211 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Honorable Clarence Cannon, B-139510, May 13, 1959 (unpub.) (Rivers and Harbors Appropriation 

exhausted; Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, unavailable to dredge channel to shipyard). 

If an agency obligates funds outside the normal appropriation process, then the agency is 

augmenting the funds that Congress has appropriated. In addition retaining those funds violates the 

Miscellaneous Receipts Statute. See 31 U.S.C. § 3302(b); see also Interest Earned on Unauthorized 

Loans of Fed. Grant Funds, B-246502, 71 Comp. Gen. 387 (1992). In addition, when the retained 

funds are expended, this also violates the constitutional requirement for an appropriation. See Use 

of Appropriated Funds by Air Force to Provide Support for Child Care Centers for Children of 

Civilian Employees, B-222989, 67 Comp. Gen. 443 (1988); Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and 

Firearms--Augmentation of Appropriations--Replacement of Autos by Negligent Third Parties, B226004, 67 Comp. Gen. 510 (1988). 

There are, however, statutory exceptions to the Miscellaneous Receipts Statute. For example intraand intergovernmental acquisition authorities allow agencies to retain and use funds from sources 

other than those appropriated by Congress. See, e.g., Economy Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1535. The 

Economy Act authorizes a federal agency to order supplies or services from another federal agency. 

For these transactions, the requesting agency must reimburse the performing agency fully for the 

direct and indirect costs of providing the goods and services. See Washington Nat’l Airport; Fed. 

Aviation Admin., B-136318, 57 Comp. Gen. 674 (1978) (depreciation and interest); Obligation of 

Funds Under Mil. Interdep’tal Purchase Requests, B-196404, 59 Comp. Gen. 563 (1980); see also 

DoD 7000.14-R, vol. 11A, ch. 1, para. 010201.J. (waiving overhead for transactions within DoD). 

Judge advocates may wish to consult agency regulations for order approval requirements. See, e.g., 

Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 17.5; Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 

217.5; and the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement Subpart 17.5. 

Congress also has authorized certain expenditures for military support to civil law enforcement 

agencies (CLEAs) in counter-drug operations. Support to CLEAs is reimbursable unless it occurs 

during normal training and results in DoD receiving a benefit substantially equivalent to that which 

otherwise would be obtained from routine training or operations. See 10 U.S.C. § 377. Another 

statutory provision authorizes operations or training to be conducted for the sole purpose of 

providing CLEAs with specific categories of support. See § 1004 of the 1991 Defense 

Authorization Act, codified at 10 U.S.C. § 374, note. In 10 U.S.C. § 124, Congress assigned DoD 

the operational mission of detecting and monitoring international drug traffic (a traditional CLEA 

function). By authorizing DoD support to CLEAs at essentially no cost, Congress has authorized 

augmentation of CLEA appropriations. 

2. Time 

The “time” control has two major elements: Appropriations have a definite life span; and 

appropriations normally must be used for the needs that arise during their period of availability. 

Most appropriations are available for a finite period. For example, Operation and Maintenance 

(O&M) funds, the appropriation most prevalent in an operational setting, are available for one year; 

procurement appropriations are available for three years; and construction funds have a five-year 

period of availability. If funds are not obligated during their period of availability, they expire and 

are unavailable for new obligations (e.g., new contracts or changes outside the scope of an existing 

contract). Expired funds may be used, however, to adjust existing obligations (e.g., to pay for a 

price increase following an in-scope change to an existing contract). The “bona fide needs rule” 

provides that funds are available only to satisfy requirements that arise during their period of 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 212 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

availability, and will affect which fiscal year appropriation you will use to acquire supplies and 

services. See 31 U.S.C. § 1502(a). This is commonly referred to as using current year funds for 

current needs. 

The bona fide need for supplies normally exists when the government actually will be able to use 

the items. Thus, a command would use a currently available appropriation for computers needed 

and purchased in the current fiscal year. Conversely, commands may not use current year funds for 

computers that are not needed until the next fiscal year. Year-end spending for computers that will 

be delivered within a reasonable time after the new fiscal year begins is proper, however, as long as 

a current need is documented. Note that there are “lead-time” and “stock-level” exceptions to the 

general rule governing purchases of supplies. See Defense Finance and Accounting Service Reg. 

Indianapolis 37-1 [DFAS-IN 37-1], ch. 8. In any event, “stockpiling” items is prohibited. See Mr. 

H.V. Higley, B-134277, Dec. 18, 1957 (unpub.). 

Normally, severable services are bona fide needs of the period in which they are performed. 

Grounds maintenance, custodial services, and vehicle/equipment maintenance are examples of 

recurring services considered severable. Use current year funds for recurring services performed in 

the current fiscal year. As an exception however, 10 U.S.C. § 2410a permits funding a contract (or 

other agreement) for severable services using an appropriation current when the contract is 

executed, even if some services will be performed in the subsequent fiscal year. Conversely, 

nonseverable services are bona fide needs of the year in which a contract (or other agreement) is 

executed. Nonseverable services are those that contemplate a single undertaking, e.g., studies, 

reports, overhaul of an engine, painting a building, etc. Fund the entire undertaking with 

appropriations current when the contract (or agreement) is executed. See DFAS-IN 37-1, ch. 8. 

3. Amount 

The Anti-Deficiency Act (ADA) prohibits any government officer or employee from making or 

authorizing an expenditure or obligation in advance of or in excess of an appropriation (31 U.S.C. § 

1341); making or authorizing an expenditure or incurring an obligation in excess of a formal 

subdivision of funds, or in excess of amounts permitted by regulations prescribed under 31 U.S.C. § 

1514(a) (31 U.S.C. § 1517); or accepting voluntary services, unless authorized by law (31 U.S.C. § 

1342). 

Commanders must ensure that fund obligations and expenditures do not exceed amounts provided 

by higher headquarters. Although over obligation of an installation O&M account normally does 

not trigger a reportable ADA violation, an over-obligation locally may lead to a breach of a formal 

O&M subdivision at the Major Command level. See 31 U.S.C. § 1514(a) (requiring agencies to 

subdivide and control appropriations by establishing administrative subdivisions); 31 U.S.C. 1517; 

DFAS-IN 37-1, ch. 4. 

Commanders must investigate suspected violations to establish responsibility and discipline 

violators. Regulations require “flash reporting” of possible ADA violations. DoD 7000.14-R, 

Financial Management Regulation, vol. 14; DFAS-IN 37-1, ch. 4. If a violation is confirmed, the 

command must identify the cause of the violation as well as the senior responsible individual. 

Investigators file reports through finance channels to the office of the Assistant Secretary of the 

Army, Financial Management & Comptroller (ASA (FM&C)). Further reporting through Office of 

the Secretary of Defense (OSD), Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Government 

Chapter 13 

213 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Accountability Office (GAO), President, and Congress if ASA (FM&C) concurs with a finding of 

violation. 

By regulation, commanders must impose administrative sanctions on responsible individuals. 

Criminal action also may be taken if a violation was knowing and willful (31 U.S.C. § 1349, § 

1350). In previous cases, lawyers, commanders, contracting officers, and resource managers all 

have been found to be responsible for violations. Common problems that have triggered potential 

ADA violations include the following: 

•	 Without statutory authority, obligating (e.g., awarding a contract) current year funds for the 

bona fide needs of a subsequent fiscal year. This may occur when activities stockpile supply 

items in excess of those required to maintain normal inventory levels. 

•	 Exceeding a statutory limit (e.g., funding a contingency construction project in excess of 

$750,000 with O&M; acquiring investment items with O&M funds). 

•	 Obligating funds for purposes prohibited by annual or permanent legislation. 

•	 Obligating funds for a purpose for which Congress has not appropriated funds (e.g., personal 

expenses where there is no regulatory or case law support for the purchase or where Congress 

has placed a funding prohibition). 

C. Military Assistance to Civil Authorities 

The military’s mission is to fight and win the nation’s wars. DoD will cooperate with civil 

authorities, but the relationship is generally one of support—the civilian authorities retain primary 

responsibility. The starting point for all DoD support is DoD Directive (DoDD) 3025.18. The 

Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. § 1385) provides limitations on the types of support that the 

military may provide to civil authorities. The following consist of allowable military support to 

domestic operations. 

•	 Civil disasters and emergencies. Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 5121, et seq.), DoDD 3025.18. 

•	 Civil disturbances; Insurrection Act. 10 U.S.C. §§ 331-34, DoDD 3025.12. 

•	 Support to civilian law enforcement: 

•	 Loan of equipment. 10 U.S.C. § 372, DoDD 5525.5; 

•	 Expert advice and training. 10 U.S.C. § 373, DoDD 5525.5; 

•	 Sharing information. 10 U.S.C. § 371, DoDD 5525.5; and 

•	 Maintenance and operation of equipment. 10 U.S.C. § 374, DoDD 5525.5. 

•	 Counterdrug support: 

•	 Detection and monitoring. 10 U.S.C. § 124; and 

•	 Training and other support. Section 1004, Fiscal Year (FY) 91 NDAA, as amended by 

Section 1021, FY 02, NDAA; CJCSI 3710.01B. 

•	 Individual Readiness Training. 10 U.S.C. § 2012, DoDD 1100.20. 

•	 Department of Defense Support to Special Events to include support to International Supporting 

Events. 10 U.S.C. § 2564(a)-(c), DoDD 2000.15. 

•	 Support to Private Organizations. 10 U.S.C. § 2554 (Boy Scouts of America), 10 U.S.C. § 2555 

(Girl Scouts of America), 10 U.S.C. § 2551 (National Veterans’ Organizations), 10 U.S.C. § 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 214 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

2552 (American Red Cross), 10 U.S.C. § 2558 (National Military Associations), and 10 U.S.C. 

§ 2556 (Homeless). 

•	 Loan or Lease of Non-Excess Property of a Military Department. 10 U.S.C. § 1535 (to other 

federal agencies), 10 U.S.C. § 2667 (to anyone), and Army Regulation (AR) 700-131, Loan and 

Lease of Army Material. 

•	 Military Assistance to Safety and Traffic (MAST). DoDD 3025.1M. 

•	 Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD): AR 75-14, AR 75-15. 

•	 Military Working Dogs. DoDD 5200.31, AR 190-21. 

•	 Miscellaneous support: 

•	 Sensitive support. DoDD S-5210-36; 

•	 Law enforcement detachments. 10 U.S.C. § 379; and 

•	 Emergencies involving chemical or biological weapons. 10 U.S.C. § 382. 

D. DoDD 3025.18 

This Directive governs all DoD military assistance provided to civil authorities within the 50 States, 

District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and U.S. possessions and territories. It provides six criteria 

against which all requests for support shall be evaluated. Commanders at all levels should use these 

criteria in providing a recommendation up the chain of command. 

•	 Legality - compliance with the law. 

•	 Lethality - potential use of lethal force by or against DoD forces. 

•	 Risk - safety of DoD forces. 

•	 Cost - who pays and the impact on DoD budget. 

•	 Appropriateness - whether conducting the requested mission is in the interest of DoD. 

•	 Readiness - impact on DoD’s ability to perform its primary mission. 

The Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) is the approval authority for civil disturbances, responses to 

acts of terrorism, and support that will result in a planned event with the potential for confrontation 

with specifically identified individuals or groups, or which will result in the use of lethal force. 

When Combatant Command-assigned forces are to be used, there must be coordination with the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS). CJCS will determine whether there is a significant 

issue requiring SECDEF approval, after coordination with the affected Combatant Command. 

Immediate response authority in the local commander is not affected. However, previously, local 

commanders could engage in support operations under an unwritten rule that such support should 

not normally extend beyond 72 hours. That rule is now memorialized formally in DoDD 3025.18 at 

para. 4(g)(2) (noting that “[t]he DoD official directing a response under immediate response authority 

shall reassess whether there remains a necessity for the Department of Defense to respond under this 

authority as soon as practicable but, if immediate response activities have not yet ended, not later than 

72 hours after the request for assistance was received.”) 

Chapter 13 

215 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

E. Disaster and Emergency Relief2 

The Stafford Act provides four means by which the federal government may become involved in a 

disaster and relief effort: the President may declare the area a major disaster (42 U.S.C. § 5170); the 

President may declare the area an emergency (42 U.S.C. § 5191) (same criteria as for a major 

disaster, except also requires that the governor define the type and amount of federal aid required, 

and total federal assistance may not exceed $5 million); the President may send in DoD assets on an 

emergency basis to “preserve life and property” (42 U.S.C. § 5170b(c)); and the President may send 

in federal assets where an emergency occurs in an area over which the federal government exercises 

primary responsibility by virtue of the Constitution or federal statute (42 U.S.C. § 5191(b)). 

The Department of Homeland Security, through the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) directs and coordinates the federal response on behalf of the President. DHS has prepared 

the National Response Framework, which defines fifteen Emergency Support Functions (ESF’s) for 

which certain federal agencies have either a primary or supporting role. The Corps of Engineers is 

the primary agency for ESF #3, Public Works and Engineering. DoD is a supporting agency for all 

others. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency appoints a Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO), 

typically the senior FEMA official on-scene. Because of the likelihood of DoD involvement, a 

Defense Coordinating Officer (DCO) is assigned to the FCO. The DCO, an O-6 or above, is 

identified from a Training Support Brigade (TSB). Training Support Brigades are located 

throughout the continental United States (CONUS). Training Support Brigade commanders are 

dual-hatted as DCOs. The DCO will be the FCO’s single point of contact for DoD support. The 

FCO issues Mission Assignments, defining the task and maximum reimbursement amount, to the 

federal agencies. 

The Department of Defense is reimbursed by FEMA for the incremental costs of providing support 

pursuant to the DCO’s tasking in response to the FEMA mission assignment. Incremental expenses 

are reimbursed, or those incurred by the agency providing the military assistance that—but for the 

request for assistance—would not otherwise have incurred these expenses. The Department of 

Defense Financial Management Regulation (FMR) 7000.14-R, vol. 12, ch. 6., para. 060204, lists 

the following costs as eligible for reimbursement: 

•	 Overtime, travel, and per diem of permanent DoD civilian personnel. 

•	 Wages, travel, and per diem of temporary DoD civilian personnel assigned solely to 

performance of services directed by the Executive Agent. 

•	 Travel and per diem of active duty military, and costs of reserve component personnel called to 

active duty by a federal official who is assigned solely to the performance of services directed 

by the Executive Agent. 

2

 Disaster Relief Statutes (Stafford Act), 42 U.S.C. § 5121; U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.18, DEFENSE SUPPORT 

OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES (DSCA) (29 Dec. 2010); U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, MAN. DOD 3025.1-M, DOD MANUAL FOR 

CIVIL EMERGENCIES (Jun. 1994); NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, REG. 500-1/ANGI 10-8101, MILITARY SUPPORT TO CIVIL 

AUTHORITIES (13 Jun. 2008) [hereinafter NGR 500-1]; CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS, INSTR. 3440.1C; NAVY CIVIL 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT; U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 10-802, MILITARY SUPPORT TO CIVIL AUTHORITIES (19 

Apr. 2002). 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 216 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 Cost of work, services, and material procured under contract for the purposes of providing 

assistance directed by the Executive Agent. 

•	 Cost of materials, equipment and supplies (including transportation, repair and maintenance) 

from regular stocks used in providing directed assistance. 

•	 All costs incurred which are paid from trust, revolving, or other funds, and whose 

reimbursement the law requires. 

•	 Other costs submitted with written justification or otherwise agreed to in writing by the Joint 

Director of Military Support or appropriate Service representative. 

Requests for reimbursement may be made through use of the SF 1080, Voucher for Transfers 

between Appropriations or Funds. It is important to note that Federal agencies which exceed the 

reimbursement amount, or execute tasks not within the Mission Assignment, may not be 

reimbursed. 

For the DoD response, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ 

Security Affairs (ASD(HD&ASA)) is the DoD lead for disaster relief operations. As such, they are 

the approval authority for all such support, unless it involves Combatant Command-assigned forces 

(see discussion of DoDD 3025.18, above). The Joint Director of Military Support (JDOMS) is the 

ASD(HD&ASA) agent. The JDOMS coordinates and monitors the DoD effort. The JDOMS 

normally produces the Execute Order and obtains the SECDEF’s signature for a given mission. 

USNORTHCOM (CONUS, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands) and USPACOM (Alaska, Hawaii, 

and Pacific possessions and territories) are responsible for developing disaster response plans and 

for the execution of those plans. They may form a Joint Task Force for this purpose. 

1. Immediate Response Authority 

Immediate response authority permits local military commanders to act immediately to save lives, 

prevent human suffering, and mitigate great property damage in imminently serious conditions 

when time does not permit approval from higher headquarters. Types of support authorized include 

rescue, evacuation, and emergency treatment of casualties; emergency restoration of essential public 

services; emergency removal of debris and explosive ordnance; and recovery and disposal of the 

dead. This type of support is provided on a reimbursable basis, but assistance should not be denied 

because the requester is unable or unwilling to commit to reimbursement. 

Immediate response authority is very limited and should be invoked only for bona fide emergencies. 

Contemporaneous coordination with JDOMS and ASD(HD&ASA) should always occur in these 

scenarios, and in any other case potentially involving this type of assistance to civil authorities. The 

JDOMS has indicated that this assistance should not exceed 72 hours. To obtain reimbursement for 

costs incurred as a result of an immediate response, DoD should request reimbursement from the 

state or local government to whom assistance was provided. Often, the state and local governments 

do not have the available funding to reimburse. As a result, in the past DoD has looked to the 

Defense Emergency Response Fund for reimbursement. 

2. Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) 

The DERF was created in the FY90 National Defense Appropriation Act, Pub. L. 101-165, in 

response to Hurricane Hugo. Under this provision, “the Fund is available for providing 

reimbursement to currently applicable appropriations of the [DoD] for supplies and services 

provided in anticipation of requests from other Federal Departments and agencies and State and 

Chapter 13 

217 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

local governments for assistance on a reimbursable basis to respond to natural and manmade 

disasters.” 

In FY94, § 8131 of the National Defense Appropriation Act, Pub. L. No. 103-139, amended the 

FY90 provision giving DoD the ability to request reimbursement from the DERF for its own 

disaster response efforts. Specifically, the language provides: “the Fund may be used, in addition to 

other funds available to DoD for such purposes, for expenses of DoD which are incurred in 

supplying supplies and services furnished in response to natural or manmade disasters.” 

Prior to November 2003, if the state and local government failed to reimburse, the command would 

forward reimbursement to the DERF. DoD Financial Management Regulation 7000.14-R, vol. 12, 

ch. 6. This fund is available for providing reimbursement to currently applicable appropriations of 

DoD for supplies and services provided in anticipation of requests from other federal departments 

and agencies and from state and local governments for assistance on a reimbursable basis to respond 

to natural or manmade disasters. 

Since November 2003, the DERF has been closed out (§ 1105 of the FY04 Emergency 

Supplemental Appropriations Act). This section provides that, effective 1 Nov. 2003, adjustments 

to obligations that before such date would have been properly chargeable to the DERF shall be 

charged to current appropriations available for the same purpose. If the DERF does not cover the 

costs, the request should be forwarded to FEMA. On rare occasions, FEMA has provided 

reimbursement to the DoD for Immediate Response assistance by “ratifying” the DoD action after 

the fact. Such ratification, however, is done on a case-by-case basis. Commanders cannot rely on 

FEMA doing so in every case. FEMA is under no obligation to reimburse the DoD for response 

actions taken prior to a Presidential Declaration and in some case may not have the legal authority 

to reimburse DoD if no Presidential declaration occurs. If no one reimburses the affected 

command, the costs of the Immediate Response assistance are funded through unit O&M, which is 

the most likely outcome. In some rare circumstances, such as man-made disasters, funding 

available under OPERATION NOBLE EAGLE may provide a solution. 

3. Disaster Support Involving Law Enforcement Authorities 

The Stafford Act is not an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) (18 U.S.C. § 1385). 

Therefore, any support that includes direct involvement in the enforcement of the civil law must 

undergo the PCA analysis discussed below. Typical areas of concern include directing traffic, 

guarding supply depots, and patrolling. National Guard personnel, acting in their Title 32 (State) 

status, should be used whenever possible. Law enforcement duties that involve military functions 

may be permissible (e.g., guarding a military supply depot). 

F. Civil Disturbances3 

The maintenance of law and order is primarily vested in state and local officials. Involvement of 

military forces will only be appropriate in extraordinary circumstances. Use of the military under 

3

 U.S. CONST. art. IV, § 4: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of 

Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive 

(when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence”; Insurrections, 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335; U.S. 

DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.12, MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR CIVIL DISTURBANCES (MACDIS) (4 Feb. 1994). 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 218 
 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

these authorities to conduct law enforcement activities is a specific exception to the PCA. The 

probable order of employment of forces in response to a certain situation will be (1) local and state 

police; (2) National Guard in their state status; (3) federal civil law enforcement officials; and (4) 

Federal military troops, to include National Guard called to active federal service. 

The insurrection statutes permit the President to use the armed forces domestically under certain 

circumstances. The Attorney General coordinates all federal government activities relating to civil 

disturbances. If the President decides to respond to the situation, he must first issue a proclamation 

to the insurgents, prepared by the Attorney General, directing them to disperse within a limited 

time. 10 U.S.C. § 334. At the end of that time period, the President may issue an Executive Order 

directing the use of armed forces. The Attorney General appoints a Senior Civilian Representative 

of the Attorney General (SCRAG) as his action agent. 

For the DoD response, SECDEF has reserved to himself the authority to approve support in 

response to civil disturbances (DoDD 3025.18). Although the civilian authorities have the primary 

responsibility for civil disturbances, military forces shall remain under military command and 

control at all times. Military forces shall not be used for civil disturbances unless specifically 

directed by the President (pursuant to 10 U.S.C. §§ 331-334), except for emergency employment of 

military forces in the following limited circumstances: 

•	 To prevent the loss of life or wanton destruction of property or to restore governmental 

functioning, in cases of civil disturbances, if the duly constituted authority local authorities are 

unable to control the situation and circumstances preclude obtaining prior Presidential 

authorization. 

•	 When duly constituted state or local authorities are unable or decline to provide adequate 

protection for federal property or functions. 

Although employment under these authorities permits direct enforcement of the law by military 

forces, the military’s role in law enforcement should be minimized as much as possible. DoD’s role 

is to support the civilian authorities, not replace them. Once the President directs the employment 

of military forces (federal), then this is a DoD mission and O&M funds are used to cover the cost. 

G. Support to Civilian Law Enforcement.4 

Although certain activities could be considered law enforcement type activities, they do not violate 

the PCA because they do not involve use of military personnel to provide direct assistance. With 

proper approval, DoD activities may make equipment (including associated supplies and spare 

parts), base facilities, or research facilities available to federal, state, or local law enforcement 

officials for law enforcement purposes. (This authority is expanded for chemical or biological 

incidents.) 

4 10 U.S.C. §§ 372–374, 377; U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5525.5, DOD COOPERATION WITH CIVILIAN LAW 

ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS, Encl. 3 (15 Jan. 1986) [hereinafter DoDD 5525.5]; NGR 500-1, supra note 2; U.S. DEP’T OF 

NAVY, SEC’Y NAVY INSTR. 5820.7C, COOPERATION WITH CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS, para. 8 (26 Jan. 

2006) [hereinafter SECNAVINST 5820.7C]; U.S. DEP’T OF AIR FORCE, INSTR. 10-802, MILITARY SUPPORT TO CIVIL 

AUTHORITIES, Attachment 4 (18 Apr. 2002) [hereinafter AFI 10-802]. 

Chapter 13 

219 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Under 10 U.S.C. § 374(a), SECDEF may make DoD personnel available for the maintenance of 

equipment provided, to include equipment provided pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 372. Under 10 U.S.C. 

§ 374(b)(1), SECDEF may, upon a request from the head of a federal law enforcement agency, 

make DoD personnel available to operate equipment with respect to criminal violations of the 

Controlled Substances Act, the Immigration and Naturalization Act, the Tariff Act of 1930, the 

Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act, and any law, foreign or domestic, prohibiting terrorist 

activities; a foreign or domestic counter-terrorism operation; or a rendition of a suspected terrorist 

from a foreign country to the United States to stand trial. 

Under 10 U.S.C. § 374(b)(2), DoD personnel made available to a civilian law enforcement agency 

may operate equipment for the following purposes. 

•	 Detection, monitoring, and communication of the movement of air and sea traffic. 

•	 Detection, monitoring, and communication of the movement of surface traffic outside of the 

geographic boundary of the United States and within the United States not to exceed 25 miles of 

the boundary if the initial detection occurred outside the boundary. 

•	 Aerial reconnaissance. 

•	 Interception of vessels or aircraft detected outside the land area of the United States for the 

purposes of communicating with and directing said vehicle to a specific location. 

•	 Operating equipment to facilitate communications. 

•	 Subject to joint approval by SECDEF and Attorney General: 

•	 Transportation of civilian law enforcement personnel along with any other civilian or 

military personnel who are supporting, or conducting, a joint operation with civilian law 

enforcement personnel; 

•	 Operation of a base of operations; and 

•	 Transportation of suspected terrorists from foreign countries to the U.S. for trial (so long as 

the requesting federal law enforcement agency provides all security for such transportation 

and maintains custody over the suspect through the duration of the transportation). 

1. Economy Act 

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 377, the support provided between federal agencies under these authorities 

is reimbursable under the Economy Act, unless the support is provided in the normal course of 

training or operations, or the support results in a substantially equivalent training value. Under 31 

U.S.C. § 1535, an Economy Act order may be placed by the head of an agency (delegable down to a 

warranted contracting officer) with another agency. The order may be a Military Interdepartmental 

Purchase Request (MIPR), a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for support, or an interagency 

agreement. Form is not the key—content is the critical matter. The definition of “agency” includes 

military departments. (Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 2.101) The content defines the type 

of support to be rendered and the reimbursement to be provided. 

2. Miscellaneous Receipts 

The Miscellaneous Receipts Statute, 31 U.S.C. § 3302(b), requires that any dollars received by an 

agency must go into the general treasury, without any deduction for any charges or claims, unless 

there is a positive authority like the Economy Act that allows an agency to retain the money. 

Although the language in 10 U.S.C. § 372 et seq. authorizes support to state and local civilian law 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 220 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

enforcement agencies, the reimbursement provision in 10 U.S.C. § 377 provides no mechanism for 

reimbursement except for support between federal agencies. If commanders loan equipment to state 

or local CLEAs under this authority, any reimbursement obtained would go into Miscellaneous 

Receipts. It is important to note that reimbursement is required, unless the law allows a waiver. 

The only way to avoid this problem is for the commander to lease the equipment under 10 U.S.C. § 

2667. The Leasing Statute provides a mechanism for reimbursement. If a loan is authorized, there 

must be no adverse impact on national security or military preparedness. (Specific details regarding 

the Leasing Statute are in Section L of this Chapter) 

The SECDEF is the approval authority for any requests for potentially lethal support, including 

loans of arms, combat and tactical vehicles, vessels, aircraft, or ammunition. For the Army, HQDA 

(DALO-SMS) may approve requests for non-lethal equipment in excess of sixty days. The 

installation commander may approve all other equipment requests if loan/lease is for sixty days or 

less. The HQDA (DAMO-ODS) may approve requests for use of installation or research facilities. 

For the Navy and Marine Corps, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV) (Manpower and 

Reserve Affairs) may approve requests for non-lethal equipment for more than sixty days. All other 

requests may be approved as specified in SECNAVINST 5820.7C. For the Air Force, Assistant 

Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, Installations, and Environment 

may approve requests for all non-drug related requests (AFI 10-801, Attachment 4). For the 

National Guard (NG), the loan of weapons, combat/tactical vehicles, vessels and aircraft require 

approval of the service secretary or their designee. Requests for loan/lease of NG equipment, which 

require HQDA or HQAF approval, will be reviewed by National Guard Bureau (NGB) (NGB 500­

1/ANGI 10-8101). 

3. Excess Property 

In addition to loan/lease authority, The National Defense Authorization Act of 1997 added a new 

section to Title 10. Section 2576a, “Excess Personal Property; Sale or Donation for law 

enforcement activities,” permits DoD to provide excess personal property suitable for use in 

counter-drug and counter-terrorism activities to federal and state agencies. 10 U.S.C. § 2576 

authorizes the surplus sale of military equipment to state and local law enforcement and firefighting 

agencies. 10 U.S.C. § 2576a authorizes the surplus sale or donation of military equipment to 

federal and state agencies for law enforcement. The primary focus is to support counter-drug or 

counter-terrorism activities. Recipient takes equipment on an as-is, where-is basis at no cost to 

DoD, and equipment must be drawn from current stocks. 

10 U.S.C. § 2576b authorizes the surplus sale or donation of military property to any firefighting 

agency in a state. Additionally, the same conditions concerning as-is and where-is, as noted above, 

apply to this provision. Authority to furnish small arms and ammunition is included. As of October 

1, 1995, the Defense Logistics Agency manages this program (Memorandum of the Secretary of 

Defense for the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, 26 June 1995). The 

four Regional Logistics Support Offices (Buffalo, Miami, El Paso, and Los Angeles) actually 

provide this excess property. 

Chapter 13 

221 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

4. Expert Advice and Training5 

Military personnel may be used to train civilian law enforcement personnel in the use of equipment 

that the military provides. Large scale or elaborate training programs are prohibited, as is regular or 

direct involvement of military personnel in activities that are fundamentally civilian law 

enforcement operations. The Deputy Secretary of Defense has provided policy guidance in this 

area, which limits the types of training U.S. forces may provide. The policy is based on prudent 

concerns that advanced training could be misapplied or misused by CLEAs, resulting in death or 

injury to non-hostile persons. 

The memorandum permits basic military training such as basic marksmanship, patrolling, 

medical/combat lifesaver, mission planning, and survival skills. It prohibits what it terms “advance 

military training,” which is defined as “high intensity training which focuses on the tactics, 

techniques, and procedures (TTPs) required to apprehend, arrest, detain, search for, or seize a 

criminal suspect when the potential for a violent confrontation exists.” Examples of such training 

are sniper training, Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT), Advanced MOUT, and Close 

Quarter Battle/Close Quarter Combat (CQB/CQC) training. A single general exception exists to 

provide this advanced training at the U.S. Army Military Police School. In addition, Commander, 

U.S. Special Operations Command may approve this training, on an exceptional basis, by special 

operations forces personnel. 

Military personnel may also be called upon to provide expert advice to civilian law enforcement 

personnel. However, regular or direct involvement in activities that are fundamentally civilian law 

enforcement operations is prohibited. A specific example of this type of support is military working 

dog team support to civilian law enforcement. The dogs have been analogized to equipment, and 

their handlers to providers of expert advice (DoDD 5525.10, Using Military Working Dog Teams to 

Support Law Enforcement Agencies in Counterdrug Missions, 17 Sept. 1990; Military Working 

Dog Program, AFI 31-202). 

The SECDEF is the approval authority for training or expert advice to law enforcement in which 

there is a potential for confrontation between the trained law enforcement and specifically identified 

civilian individuals or groups, for assignments of fifty or more DoD personnel, or for a period of 

assignment of more than thirty days. The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Manpower, Reserve 

Affairs, and Logistics) is the approval authority for any other assignment. For the Army, Joint 

Director of Military Support (JDOMS) is the approval authority. For the Navy and Marine Corps, it 

is the Secretary of the Navy (SECNAVINST 5820.7C, para. 9.e). 

Support provided under these authorities to a federal agency is reimbursable under the Economy 

Act, unless the support is provided in the normal course of training or operations, or the support 

results in a substantially equivalent training value. It is important to note that pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 

§ 6505, the “Intergovernmental Cooperation Act,” authorizes federal agencies to provide to state 

and local governments “statistical and other studies and compilations, development projects, 

technical tests and evaluations, technical information, training activities, surveys, reports, and 

documents and other similar services that an executive agent is especially competent and authorized 

by law to perform.” 

5 10 U.S.C. §§ 373, 375, 377; 50 U.S.C. §§ 2312, 2315; DoDD 5525.5, supra note 4, Encl. 4; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, 

supra note 4, paras. 9.a.(4)–(5); AFI 10-802, supra note 4. 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 222 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

This list is very specific and really does not include the type of operational assistance that state and 

local governments request from DoD. Two common requests are for the provision of “technical 

information and training activities.” OMB Circular A-97 defines these two as follows: 1) training 

of the type which the federal agency is authorized by law to conduct for federal personnel and 

others or which is similar to such training; and 2) technical information, data processing, 

communications, and personnel management systems services which the federal agency normally 

provides for itself or others under existing authorities. 

What 31 U.S.C. § 6505 does provide for is a reimbursement mechanism between the federal and 

state/local level because reimbursements received by the federal agency for the costs of services 

provided will be deposited to the credit of the principal appropriation or other account from which 

the costs of providing the services have been paid or are to be charged. It is important to remember 

that these reimbursed dollars do not go into the Miscellaneous Receipts account. 

5. Sharing Information6 

Any information collected in the normal course of military operations may be provided to 

appropriate civilian law enforcement agencies. Collection must be compatible with military 

training and planning. To the maximum extent practicable, the needs of civilian law enforcement 

officials shall be taken into account in planning and execution of military training and operations 

(10 U.S.C. § 371(b)). 

H. Counterdrug Support7 

Counterdrug support operations have become an important activity within DoD. All DoD support is 

coordinated through the Office of the Defense Coordinator for Drug Enforcement Policy and 

Support (DEP&S), which is located within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 

Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD (SO/LIC)). DoD support to counterdrug 

operations is funded through annual DoD appropriations unlike other support provided by DoD, 

which must be reimbursed by the agency receiving support. For FY04, Congress appropriated 

nearly $836 million for DoD counterdrug support. The Office of the Defense Coordinator for Drug 

Enforcement Policy and Support channels that money to the providers of counterdrug support. 

1. Detection and Monitoring 

DoD is the lead federal agency for detection and monitoring (D&M) of aerial and maritime transit 

of illegal drugs into the United States (10 U.S.C. § 124). D&M is therefore a DoD mission. 

Although a military mission, D&M is to be carried out in support of federal, state, and local law 

enforcement authorities. Note that the statute does not extend to D&M missions covering land 

transit (i.e., the Mexican border). Interception of vessels or aircraft is permissible outside the land 

area of the United States to identify and direct the vessel or aircraft to a location designated by the 

6 10 U.S.C. § 371; DoDD 5525.5, supra note 4, Encl. 2; SECNAVINST 5820.7C, supra note 4, para. 7; AFI 10-802, 

supra note 4, ch. 4.
 7 10 U.S.C. § 124; 32 U.S.C. § 112; sec. 1004, FY91 NDAA as amended by sec. 1021, FY02 NDAA; sec. 1031, FY97
 

NDAA; sec. 1033, FY98 NDAA; DEP&S Policy of 26 Jan. 1995; CHAIRMAN JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, INSTR. 3710.01B,
 

DOD COUNTERDRUG SUPPORT (26 Jan. 2007) [hereinafter CJCSI 3710.01B]; NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, REG. 500­

2/ANGI 10-801, NATIONAL GUARD COUNTERDRUG SUPPORT (28 Aug. 2008). 

Chapter 13 

223 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

supported civilian authorities. Detection and monitoring missions involve airborne (Airborne 

Warning and Control Systems (AWACS), aerostats), seaborne (primarily U.S. Navy (USN) 

vessels), and land-based radar (to include Remote Over The Horizon Radar (ROTHR)) sites. 

Federal funding for National Guard counterdrug activities, to include pay, allowances, travel 

expenses, and operations and maintenance expenses is provided pursuant to 32 U.S.C. § 112. The 

State must prepare a drug interdiction and counter-drug activities plan. The Office of the Defense 

Coordinator for Drug Enforcement Policy and Support reviews each State’s implementation plan 

and disburses funds. 

2. Additional Support 

Congress has given DoD additional authorities to support federal, state, local, and foreign 

governments that have counterdrug responsibilities. These are in addition to the authorities 

contained in 10 U.S.C. §§ 371–377 (discussed above). These have not been codified, however, so it 

is necessary to refer to the public laws instead. Many of these are reproduced in the notes following 

10 U.S.C. § 374 in the annotated codes. Section 1004, as amended by § 1021, is the primary 

authority used for counterdrug operations. The statute permits broad support to federal, state, and 

local as well as foreign authorities (when requested by a federal counterdrug agency, typically the 

Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) or a member of the State Department country team that has 

counterdrug responsibilities). These authorities are not exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, and 

any support provided must comply with the restrictions of the PCA. Additionally, any domestic 

training provided must comply with the Deputy Secretary of Defense policy on advanced training. 

Types of permitted support include maintenance and repair of equipment; transportation of 

personnel (United States and foreign), equipment, and supplies CONUS/OCONUS; establishment 

of bases of operations CONUS/OCONUS; training of law enforcement personnel, to include 

associated support and training expenses; detection and monitoring of air, sea, surface traffic 

outside the United States, and within twenty-five miles of the border if the detection occurred 

outside the United States; construction of roads, fences, and lighting along U.S. border; linguist and 

intelligence analyst services; aerial and ground reconnaissance; and establishment of command, 

control, communication, and computer networks for improved integration of law enforcement, 

active military, and National Guard activities. 

Approval authorities are contained in CJCSI 3710.01B. Non-operational support—that which does 

not involve the active participation of DoD personnel—including the provision of equipment only, 

use of facilities, and formal schoolhouse training, is requested and approved in accordance with 

DoDD 5525.5 and implementing Service regulations, discussed above. For operational support, the 

Secretary of Defense is the approval authority. The approval will typically be reflected in a CJCSissued deployment order. 

The SECDEF has delegated approval authority for certain missions to Combatant Commanders, 

with the ability for further delegation, but no delegation lower than a flag officer. The delegation 

from SECDEF depends on the type of support provided, the number of personnel provided, and the 

length of the mission. See CJCSI 3710.01B. Example: for certain missions along the southwest 

border of the U.S., the delegation runs from SECDEF to NORTHCOM to Joint Task Force North 

(JTF North). Requests for DoD support must meet the following criteria: 

• Support request must have a clear counterdrug connection; 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 224 
 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

•	 Support request must originate with federal, state or local agency having counterdrug 

responsibilities; 

•	 Request must be for support DoD is authorized to provide; 

•	 Support must clearly assist with counterdrug activities of agency; 

•	 Support is consistent with DoD support of the National Drug Control Strategy; 

•	 DEP&S Priorities for the provision of support; 

•	 Multi-jurisdictional, multi-agency task forces that are in a high intensity drug trafficking area 

(HIDTA); 

•	 Individual agencies in a HIDTA; 

•	 Multi-jurisdictional, multi-agency task forces not in a HIDTA; 

•	 Individual agencies not in a HIDTA; 

•	 All approved CD operational support must have military training value. 

Under § 1206, of the FY 1990 NDAA, Congress directed the armed forces, to the maximum extent 

practicable, to conduct training exercises in declared drug interdiction areas. In § 1031 of the FY 

1997 NDAA, Congress authorized and provided additional funding specifically for enhanced 

support to Mexico. The support involves the transfer of certain non-lethal specialized equipment 

such as communication, radar, navigation, and photo equipment. Under § 1033, FY 1998 NDAA, 

Congress authorized, and provided additional funding specifically for, enhanced support to 

Colombia and Peru. Section 1021 of the FY 2004 NDAA, expands the list of eligible countries to 

include Afghanistan, Bolivia, Ecuador, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. This 

authority was extended by § 1021 of the FY 2009 National Defense Authorization Act. This 

authority is subject to extension by the annual National Defense Authorization Act; the latest 

NDAA will determine what funds have been specifically authorized by Congress, who those funds 

were authorized for, and what the funding limitations are. 

I. Innovative Readiness Training8 

Innovative Readiness Training (IRT) is primarily a guard and reserve program and is similar in 

appearance to 10 U.S.C. § 401, Humanitarian and Civic Assistance (HCA) for overseas operations. 

IRT is military training conducted off base in the civilian community that utilizes the units and 

individuals of the armed forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of a military department or a 

combatant commander, to assist civilian efforts in addressing civic and community needs of the 

United States, its territories and possessions, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico as provided for 

within 10 U.S.C. § 2012. 

Examples of IRT activities include constructing rural roads and aircraft runways, small building and 

warehouse construction in remote areas; transporting medical supplies, equipment and material to 

medically underserved areas of the country; and providing medical and dental care to Native 

Americans, Alaska Natives, and other medically underserved communities. 

Any federal, regional, state, or local governmental entity is eligible to receive the assistance, as are 

youth and charitable organizations specified in § 508 of Title 32, and any other entity as may be 

10 U.S.C. § 2012; U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 1100.20, SUPPORT AND SERVICES FOR ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS AND 

ACTIVITIES OUTSIDE THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (12 Apr. 2004); DoD Policy Memoranda dated July 1999, Aug. 

2000, and Apr. 2002. 

Chapter 13 

225 Funding Domestic Support Operations 

8 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

approved by SECDEF on a case-by-case basis. There must be a relationship to military training. 

Assistance may be provided only if: (1) the assistance provided accomplishes valid unit training 

requirements; or (2) the assistance provided by an individual involves tasks that directly relate to the 

specific Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) of the military member. 

An exception exists if the unit assistance consists primarily of military manpower and the total 

amount of such assistance on a particular project does not exceed 100 man-hours. For most 

projects, the requests will be fulfilled by volunteers and any assistance other than manpower will be 

extremely limited. Government vehicles may be used, but only to provide transportation to and 

from the work site. The use of Government aircraft is prohibited. 

Operations and Maintenance funding expenditures are authorized for expendable readiness training 

items only. These may include, but are not limited to, the following: fuel; equipment lease; travel; 

training supplies; and incidental costs to support the training not normally provided for a 

deployment. Innovative Readiness Training O&M funds are not authorized for the payment of 

civilian manpower contracts, e.g., contracting a civilian labor force to perform duties related to IRT 

activities (19 July 1999, DoD policy memorandum). DoD policy memorandum dated 24 Aug. 

2000 provides guidance that annual National Defense Authorization and Appropriation Acts will 

authorize the transfer of a certain amount of defense-wide O&M funds ($20 million in FY03) to be 

transferred to fund pay and allowances for personnel working on IRT program projects. In April 

2002, DoD issued additional guidelines to include the requirement for a Certification of NonCompetition with other public or private sector organizations. This comports with the statutory 

language that “the assistance is not reasonably available from a commercial entity.” Innovative 

Readiness Training assistance is not authorized in response to natural or man-made disasters or in 

support of civilian law enforcement. 

J. DoD Support to Special Events9 

Upon the request of a federal, state, or local government agency responsible for providing law 

enforcement services, security services, or safety services, the SECDEF may authorize the 

commander of a military installation or other DoD facility or a Combatant Commander to provide 

assistance for special events, including international sporting events such as World Cup Soccer 

Games, the Goodwill Games, the Olympics, and any other civilian sporting event. The Attorney 

General must certify that such assistance is necessary to meet essential security or safety needs. 

Additional conditions are that such assistance cannot reasonably be met by another source or 

agency, that there is no adverse impact on military readiness, and that the requesting agency agrees 

to reimburse DoD. It is important to note that this statutory provision does not apply to Special 

Olympics and The Paralympics because these events are authorized and funded under a different 

authority, the Support for International Sporting Competitions (SISC) account that funds support of 

International Sporting Competitions. Support provided under 10 U.S.C. § 2564 is reimbursable 

under the Economy Act, unless the support is provided in the normal course of training or 

operations, or the support results in a substantially equivalent training value. 

9 10 U.S.C. § 2564; U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 2000.15, SUPPORT TO SPECIAL EVENTS (8 Dec. 2003) [hereinafter 

DoDD 2000.15]. 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 226 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

The SISC account established in 1996 pursuant to Pub. L. No. 104-208, § 5802 is a “no year” 

account that consolidated appropriations of previous events. As noted earlier, DoD transfers O&M 

into this account. Because the account is set up as a “no year use until expended account,” that rule 

applies to any money transferred into the account. The account authorized the funding of logistical 

and security support (other than pay and non-travel-related allowances of members of the Armed 

Forces of the United States, except for members of the reserve components thereof called or ordered 

to active duty in connection with providing such support). 

In the NDAA FY2002, Pub. L. No. 107-107, § 302, Congress amended the law to include state 

active duty and full-time National Guard to be included in the definition of “active duty.” Under 

this change, the SISC account could fund the pay and non-travel-related allowances of these two 

groups of individuals when they provided essential security and safety support during the 2002 

Winter Olympic Games and the 2002 Paralympic Games. In the same provision, Congress waived 

the requirement that the Attorney General had to certify that support was necessary for the 2002 

Winter Olympic Games. It is important to note that this waiver was event-specific, and ordinarily 

certification by the Attorney General is required. 

K. Support to Private Organizations and Individuals 

1. Boy Scouts of America 

10 U.S.C. § 2554 allows DoD to provide equipment and transportation to the Boy Scouts for 

National and World Jamborees. Support is provided on a no-cost basis to the U.S. government and 

requires bonding to ensure reimbursement. 

2. Girl Scouts of America 

10 U.S.C. § 2555 allows DoD to provide transportation only to Girl Scouts to support international 

Girl Scout events. Support is provided on a no-cost basis to the U.S. government and requires 

bonding to ensure reimbursement. 

3. National Veterans’ Organizations 

10 U.S.C. § 2551 allows DoD to provide equipment and barracks to national veterans’ organizations 

to support state and national conventions or national youth athletic tournaments. Support is 

provided on a no-cost basis to the U.S. government and requires bonding to ensure reimbursement. 

4. American Red Cross 

10 U.S.C. § 2552 allows DoD to provide equipment for instruction and practice to the American 

Red Cross. Support is provided on a no-cost basis to the U.S. government and requires bonding 

(twice value of equipment loaned) to ensure reimbursement. 

5. National Military Associations 

DoD is allowed by 10 U.S.C. § 2558 to provide specified support to designated “National Military 

Associations” for their national conventions. Specified support includes limited air and ground 

transportation, communications, medical assistance, administrative support, and security support. 

Support is provided under the following conditions: (1) the Service Secretary concerned has 

approved the support in advance; (2) the support is provided in conjunction with training in 

Chapter 13 

227 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

appropriate military skills; and (3) support can be provided within existing funds otherwise 

available to the Service Secretary concerned, i.e., O&M. 

6. Homeless Individuals 

10 U.S.C. § 2556 allows DoD to provide incidental services to shelter homeless individuals. These 

incidental services include utilities, bedding, security, transportation, renovation of facilities, minor 

repairs to make facility available, and property liability insurance. Support is on a nonreimbursable basis and may not have an adverse impact on military readiness or interfere with 

military operations. 

L. Loan or Lease of Non-Excess Property of a Military Department10 

1. Authorized Loan or Lease of Non-Excess Property 

Generally, the Economy Act, 10 U.S.C. § 1535, governs the loan of DoD material to other federal 

agencies. DoD may provide supplies and equipment to other federal agencies on a reimbursable 

basis. The leasing statute, 10 U.S.C. § 2667, governs the lease of DoD property to organizations 

outside the government when a determination has been made that: (1) for the period of the lease, the 

materiel is not needed for public use; (2) it is not excess property; and (3) the lease will promote the 

national defense or be in the public interest. 

The Army is the only service that has a regulation governing the loan or lease of its materiel: AR 

700-131. Army Policy is that Army materiel is intended for the Army mission. Army material will 

only be loaned or leased under compelling circumstances and when the material sought is not 

otherwise needed for mission requirements. Agencies loaning or leasing materiel from an Army 

activity are responsible for all costs associated with the loan or lease to include shipping, return, and 

repair of the materiel. Loans and leases are primarily approved on the basis of their purpose and 

duration. The following factors will be considered in determining whether to approve a loan or 

lease: 

• Military requirements and priorities; 

• Stocks and programmed Army requirements; 

• Type classification with pending changes; 

• Minimum diversion of Army stocks; 

• The adequacy of the borrower’s resources; and 

• The availability of commercial resources such as commercial lessors. 

The approval authority for a loan or lease of Army materiel varies based on the category of 

equipment being requested. Table 2-1, AR 700-131 provides a comprehensive list of the categories 

of equipment that may be loaned or leased, and the proper approval authority. Army material 

loaned or leased in response to a natural or manmade disaster will be reported to JDOMS as soon as 

possible. The property officer who is accountable for the equipment loaned or leased will keep all 

records of loans of DoD material. Loans are made at no additional cost to the government. 

10 10 U.S.C. § 2667; U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 700-131, LOAN, LEASE, AND DONATION OF ARMY MATERIEL (23 Aug. 

2004); U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 725-1, SPECIAL AUTHORIZATION AND PROCEDURES FOR ISSUES, SALES, AND LOANS 

(17 Oct. 2003). 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 228 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

Borrowers are responsible for all incremental costs (costs above the normal Army operating 

expenses) and these will be identified and added into the loan agreement. 

Agencies loaning or leasing materiel from an Army activity are responsible for all costs associated 

with the loan or lease to include shipping, return, and repair of the materiel. Reimbursable 

incremental costs include the following: 

•	 Any overtime pay and pay of additional civilian personnel required to accompany, operate, 

maintain, or safeguard borrowed equipment; 

•	 Travel and per diem expenses of Army personnel (military and civilian); 

•	 Packing, crating, handling, and shipping from supply source to destination and return, to include 

port loading and off loading; 

•	 All transportation, including return for repair and renovation; 

•	 Hourly rate for the use of Army aircraft; 

•	 Petroleum, oils, and lubricants (including aviation fuel); 

•	 The cost of material lost, destroyed, or damaged beyond economical repair; 

•	 Utilities (gas, water, heat, and electricity); 

•	 Any modification or rehabilitation or real property that affects its future use by the Army; 

•	 Overhaul of returned material; 

•	 Repair parts used in maintenance and renovation; 

•	 Price decline of borrowed stock fund material at which returned property can be sold; 

•	 Issue and turn-in inspection labor costs; 

•	 Charges for the use of vehicles, except POL and per diem costs; and 

•	 Use of real property. 

It is important to note that in addition to the above reimbursable costs, leases require the borrower 

to pay a lease fee equal to the fair market value of the lease interest in the property. 

2. Emergency Exceptions 

Emergency loans or leases are those made to prevent “loss of life, grave bodily harm, or major 

destruction of property, and when the lack of communications facilities prevents the use of normal 

procedures.” Emergency loans and leases will not be withheld because a formal reimbursement 

agreement has not been negotiated and concluded. Additionally, loans or leases that would 

otherwise be permitted by service regulations may be approved under emergency conditions at the 

local level, vice the approval level designated in Table 2-1 of AR 700-131. Emergency requests for 

the loan or lease of Army materiel may be made verbally or electronically. The borrower must send 

a formal written request to the lending agency as soon as possible, and must complete a loan or 

lease agreement within five days of the original transaction. 

Leases carry additional requirements under AR 700-131. Army materiel will not be leased if a 

reasonable counterpart can be purchased or leased in the commercial market. Leases are limited to 

a maximum five-year term unless the Secretary of the Army (SECARMY), or one of his designees, 

approves an extended lease term. The SECARMY also has the authority to revoke a loan or a lease 

at any time. Lessees must post a surety bond to cover damage or loss of the leased property and, if 

necessary, show proof of either vehicular or hull insurance. In an emergency a lease may be made 

without a bond, but the bond must be posted within five days of the lease. FAR Part 28 governs the 

bonding requirements. The SECARMY must approve any bond forfeiture. Bonds are normally 

Chapter 13 

229 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
 

 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

forfeited when the materiel is not returned at the end of the lease period or the lessee refuses to pay 

for damage or other lease expenses. 

Once a loan or lease is approved, a loan or lease agreement will be entered into before the materiel 

is delivered. The agreement will reflect the statutory basis for the loan or lease, and will describe in 

detail all terms of the loan or lease and the responsibilities of both parties. The official accountable 

for the property of the borrowing activity must sign the loan or lease agreement. The loan or lease 

agreement will be held by the activity that issues the material until final settlement. When DoD has 

made a lease of personal property, the costs associated with the lease are placed into a special 

account established for the respective defense agency whose property is subject to the lease. 

Amounts in the account are available solely for maintenance, repair, restoration or replacement of 

leased personal property. 

M. Military Assistance to Safety and Traffic11 

Under the MAST program, DoD provides aerial MEDEVAC to civilian communities who have no 

comparable services or until such time as they can be established. The participating command pays 

for the funding of the program, i.e., it comes out of unit O&M funds. Also, participation in the 

MAST program shall not cause an increase in the funding required to operate the unit. The 

appropriate state or local officials will provide special equipment and/or radios necessary to 

participate in the program at no cost to the U.S. Government. U.S. Government officials will 

provide supervision and technical assistance for the installation of radio equipment. Non-DoD 

physicians, nurses, and emergency medical personnel may be transported in conjunction with a 

MAST mission. Normally, one next-of-kin may be transported if necessary for the best interests of 

the patient. Any other transportation of non-DoD personnel is governed by service regulations. 

N. Explosive Ordnance Disposal12 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) is the detection, identification, field evaluation, rendering– 

safe, recovery, and final disposition of unexploded explosive ordnance (UXO). AR 75-14, para. 3f. 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal operations outside of DoD installations are primarily the 

responsibility of civil authorities. DoD may provide EOD assistance, in the form of EOD actions 

and/or advice, upon request from federal agencies or civil authorities at any level, when the service 

concerned determines that such assistance is required or desirable in the interest of public safety. 

AR 75-14, para. 7b(3). Each service is responsible for all self-caused Explosive Ordnance 

contamination on its own installations and operation basses. AR 75-14, para. 7d(3)(a). EOD 

assistance involving formerly used defense sites (FUDS) will be funded from the Environment 

Restoration Accounts. AR 75-14, para. 7d(3)(e). Services must request reimbursement for EOD 

services rendered for non-DoD incidents from the requesting agency. AR 75-15, para. 3-2d. 

11 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 3025.1-M, DOD MANUAL FOR CIVIL EMERGENCIES (Apr. 2001). 

12 U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 75-14/U.S. DEP’T OF NAVY, INSTR. 8027.1G/MARINE CORPS ORDER 8027.1D/U.S. DEP’T 

OF AIR FORCE, REG. 136-8, INTERSERVICE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL (14 Feb. 1992); U.S.
 

DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 75-15, RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE (1 Nov. 1978).
 

Chapter 13 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 230 
 

 

 

Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

O. Military Working Dogs13 

Military working dogs include patrol dogs, and patrol dogs with specialized training in either 

narcotic/contraband detection, or explosive detection. Explosive Detector Dogs team assistance 

may be provided to federal agencies or civil authorities. Upon a request from a federal agency or 

state or local civilian authority at any level, the installation commander concerned makes a 

determination that such assistance is required in the interest of public safety. AR 190-12, para. 4­

11a(1). Requests for assistance may only be honored from civilian authorities, not private citizens. 

AR 190-12, para. 4-11b(1). Requesting agencies must agree to meet reimbursement requirements 

and utilize DD Form 1926 (Explosive Ordnance Disposal Civil Release and Reimbursement 

Agreement). AR 190-12, para. 4-11b(2). 

P. Miscellaneous Support14 

To respond to an emergency involving biological or chemical weapons of mass destruction that is 

beyond the capabilities of the civil authorities to handle, the Secretary of the Department of 

Homeland Security may request DoD assistance directly. Available assistance would include 

monitoring, containing, disabling, and disposing of the weapon. Regulations required by the 

statute, which would implement this authority, have not yet been promulgated. For weapons of 

mass destruction, federal funding is provided to DoD to develop and maintain domestic terrorism 

rapid response teams to aid federal, state, and local officials and responders. There are currently 

thirty-seven response teams, composed of full time Army and Air National Guard members. These 

teams are federally resourced, trained, evaluated, and operating under federal doctrine. They 

perform their missions, however, primarily under the command and control of state governors. If 

the teams are federalized, they fall under the command and control of Joint Task Force, Civil 

Support (JTF-CS). 

Q. Miscellaneous Exceptions 

DoDD 5525.5, Encl. 4, para. E,4.1.2., contains a list of situations containing express authorization 

for the use of military forces to enforce the civil law. Among them are protection of the President, 

Vice President, and other dignitaries, assistance in the case of crimes against members of Congress, 

foreign officials, or involving nuclear materials. 

13 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5200.31E, SINGLE MANAGER FOR DOD WORKING DOGS PROGRAM (29 Mar. 2006); 

U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 190-12, MILITARY WORKING DOGS (4 Jun. 2007). 

14 10 U.S.C. §§ 379, 382; Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act (Nunn-Lugar-Domenici Act); Pub. L. 

104–201; DoDDS-5210.36. 

Chapter 13 

231 Funding Domestic Support Operations 
Domestic Operational Law Handbook 2011 

THIS PAGE LEFT 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK 

Chapter 13
 

Funding Domestic Support Operations 232