LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN
 

CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE
 

MITCH RELIEF EFFORTS, 1998-1999
 

LESSONS LEARNED
 

FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES
 

CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS
 

(CLAMO)
 

600 MASSIE ROAD
 

CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22903-1781
 

CLAMO@HQDA.ARMY.MIL
 

CLAMO@HQDA-S.ARMY.SMIL.MIL
 

WWW.JAGCNET.ARMY.MIL/CLAMO
 
 

 

CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS
 

(CLAMO) 

Director 

COL David E. Graham 

Deputy Director 

LTC Sharon E. Riley 

Director, Domestic Operational Law 

LTC Gordon W. Schukei 

Director, Training & Support 

CPT Alton L. Gwaltney, III 

Marine Representative 

Maj William H. Ferrell, USMC 

Automation Technician 

Mr. Ben R. Morgan 

Training Centers 

LTC Richard M. Whitaker Battle Command Training Program 

MAJ Phillip W. Jussell Battle Command Training Program 

CPT Michael L. Roberts Combat Maneuver Training Center 

MAJ Paul S. Wilson Joint Readiness Training Center 

CPT Rodney R. LeMay Joint Readiness Training Center 

CPT Peter R. Hayden Joint Readiness Training Center 

SFC Rod Celestaine Joint Readiness Training Center 

CPT Stephen L. Harms National Training Center 

CPT Jonathan Howard National Training Center 

Contact the Center 

The Center’s mission is to examine legal issues that arise during all phases of military operations 

and to devise training and resource strategies for addressing those issues. It seeks to fulfill this mission in 

five ways. First, it is the central repository within The Judge Advocate General's Corps for all-source 

data, information, memoranda, after-action materials and lessons learned pertaining to legal support to 

operations, foreign and domestic. Second, it supports judge advocates by analyzing all data and 

information, developing lessons learned across all military legal disciplines, and by disseminating these 

lessons learned and other operational information to the Army, Marine Corps, and Joint communities 

through publications, instruction, training, and databases accessible to operational forces, world-wide. 

Third, it supports judge advocates in the field by responding to requests for assistance, by engaging in a 

continuous exchange of information with the Combat Training Centers and their judge advocate 

observer-controllers, and by creating operational law training guides. Fourth, it integrates lessons 

learned from operations and the Combat Training Centers into emerging doctrine and into the curricula 

of all relevant courses, workshops, orientations, and seminars conducted at The Judge Advocate 

General’s School. Fifth, in conjunction with The Judge Advocate General’s School, it sponsors 

conferences and symposia on topics of interest to operational lawyers 

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

the U.S. Army, The Judge Advocate General, the U.S. Marine Corps, or the Staff Judge Advocate to the 

Commandant of the Marine Corps. The Center welcomes and solicits suggestions and contributions of 

relevant operational law materials from the field. 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS
 

IN CENTRAL AMERICA:
 

HURRICANE MITCH RELIEF
 

EFFORTS, 1998-1999
 

LESSONS LEARNED FOR
 

JUDGE ADVOCATES
 

CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS 

15 September 2000
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

PREFACE
 

This is the first interagency After Action Report produced by the Center for Law and 

Military Operations. This Report identifies lessons learned for judge advocates and other 

agency attorneys who participated in United States relief operations that took place in 

Central America following Hurricane Mitch, from 1998-1999. This Report is the result 

of a two-day conference hosted by the Center at The Judge Advocate General’s School, 

Charlottesville, Virginia, from 23-24 April 1999. Participants included representatives of 

the following agencies: 

The U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps; 

The U.S. Air Force Judge Advocate General’s Department; 

The U.S. Army Peacekeeping Institute; 

The Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Civil Military Operations, USARSO; 

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency; 

The Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining, OSD; 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID); 

Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA); 

The Institute for Defense Analysis; and 

CARE. 

This report would not have been possible without the contributions of all 

concerned. While Law and Military Operations in Central America: Hurricane Mitch 

Relief Efforts, 1998-1999 contains lessons learned for judge advocates, it is intended to 

promote more effective interagency coordination and to assist both judge advocates and 

agency representatives in future relief operations of this nature. 

The Center finds that legal services provided during this operation validate the 

Corps’ new doctrine, contained in FM 27-100, and published 1 March 2000. Judge 

advocates increasingly practice individually, in remote locations, linked to main legal 

offices only by telephone and Internet. Judge advocates deployed in support of Hurricane 

Mitch relief efforts provided legal services to commanders and soldiers on operational 

law matters as well as all of the core military legal disciplines. Reach-back capability 

was essential to their success. The Hurricane Mitch relief effort also demonstrated that 

operations will continue to be conducted on short notice and on an interagency basis. 

Judge advocates must be prepared to deploy quickly, with operational law resource 

material, and with appropriate automation equipment. They must also be prepared to 

work with representatives of a variety of governmental, non-governmental, and private 

voluntary organizations. This Report is designed to assist in that regard. 

Lessons learned materials, to include this Report, would not be possible without 

the detailed logs, records, and files submitted to the Center by dedicated judge advocates, 

legal administrators, legal specialists, and civilians. The Center invites your 

contributions, and requests that deploying and supporting legal personnel continue to 

submit materials concerning the legal support that you provide to all forms of operations, 

so that others may learn and profit from your experience. 

i 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

ii 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

TABLE OF CONTENTS
 

I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................... 1
 

II. THE OPERATIONAL CONTEXT....................................... 3
 

A. THE HURRICANE........................................................................................ 3
 

B. THE RESPONSE........................................................................................... 5
 

1. The Immediate Response .................................................................... 5
 

2. Operation Fuerte Apoyo (“Strong Support”) ...................................... 8
 

3. The Phased Operation ....................................................................... 10
 

a. Phase I – The Emergency Phase.................................................... 10
 

b. Phase II – The Rehabilitation Phase.............................................. 12
 

c. Phase III – The Restoration Phase................................................. 13
 

III. NON-MILITARY PARTICIPANTS IN FOREIGN
 

DISASTER RELIEF OPERATIONS........................................ 15
 

A. GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS ............................................................ 16
 

1. Department of State (DOS) ................................................................ 16
 

2. The U.S. Embassy for the Affected Nation........................................ 17
 

3. United States Agency for International Development (USAID) ....... 17
 

4. Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA).................... 20
 

5. Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining (HA/D), Defense
 

Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA)......................................................... 23
 

a. Humanitarian and Civic Assistance (HCA) Program ................... 24
 

b. Humanitarian Assistance Program (HAP) .................................... 25
 

6. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)........................................... 26
 

a. USDA Food Assistance................................................................. 26
 (1) The Food for Peace Program........................................................................ 27
 

(2) The Food for Progress (FFP) Program ......................................................... 28
 

(3) Section 416(b)............................................................................................... 28
 

(b) USDA Forest Service (FS) and Disaster Assistance Support
 

Program (DASP) ............................................................................... 30
 

B. NON-GOVERNMENTAL, PRIVATE VOLUNTARY, AND INTERNATIONAL
 

ORGANIZATIONS........................................................................................... 30
 

1. CARE.................................................................................................. 30
 

2. Catholic Relief Services (CRS).......................................................... 31
 

3. Doctors Without Borders (Medecins Sans Frontieres) ..................... 32
 

iii 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

IV. LESSONS LEARNED .......................................................... 33
 

A. INTRODUCTION TO LEGAL ISSUES ...........................................................33
 

1. Legal issues confronted in a foreign disaster relief operation are
 

widely varied but largely predictable............................................................33
 

2. The type and quantity of legal issues will vary by phase (with time).34 

3. Conduct “Legal Preparation of the Battlefield” (LPB) prior to
 

deployment. ...................................................................................................35
 

B. COORDINATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENTAL, NON-GOVERNMENTAL,
 

AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS.......................................................................37
 

1. Judge advocates must identify agencies and NGOs/PVOs in the area
 

of operations..................................................................................................37
 

2. Military units must foster closer working relationships with these
 

agencies. ........................................................................................................38
 

a. Humanitarian Operations Centers (HOCs)....................................39
 

b. The Civil Military Operations Center (CMOC)............................41
 

c. Don’t forget to include International Organizations.....................43
 

d. Use tactical coordination mechanisms: Civil Affairs (CA). ........43
 

3. GOs, NGOs, PVOs and IOs can be a great resource for the U.S.
 

military. .........................................................................................................45
 

a. Interagency coordination enhances our situational awareness......45
 

(1) Damage Assessments................................................................................. 45
 

(2) Local information ........................................................................................ 48
 

b. Funding and support. .....................................................................49
 

4. NGOs and PVOs often have a different focus, time frame and culture
 

than the military.............................................................................................49
 

5. Interagency coordination is required through redeployment..............53
 

6. Interagency coordination is improving...............................................54
 

a. SOUTHCOM’s Efforts to Better Coordinate ................................54
 

b. OFDA’s Efforts to Better Coordinate............................................54
 

7. One proposal for enhanced coordination: Use PDD 56. ....................55
 

C. INTERNATIONAL LAW ..............................................................................60
 

1. Is there a Status of Forces Agreement? .............................................60
 

2. (NGOs) and (PVOs) may have agreements with the host nation.......61
 

3. Know the rules regarding negotiation of international agreements. ..61
 

4. Know the host nation governments, their organization and agenda...62
 

a. Understand host nation objectives. ...............................................63
 

b. Anticipate host nation issues. ........................................................64
 (1) Diplomatic Notes, Agreements and Status of Forces................................... 64
 

iv 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

(2) Host Nation Military and Bases.................................................................... 65
 

(3) Diplomatic Clearances.................................................................................. 65
 

(4) Local Citizen Concerns ................................................................................ 66
 

(5) Local Law..................................................................................................... 66
 

D. FISCAL LAW ........................................................................................ 68
 

1. Deployed judge advocates must have or develop expertise in fiscal
 

law and contract law. .................................................................................... 68

 2. Judge advocates will contend with multiple sources of funding during
 

foreign disaster assistance operations........................................................... 70
 

a. Generic Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Funds..................... 72
 

b. Some of the operations will be funded by a specifically approved
 

appropriation. .................................................................................... 73
 (1) Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Aid (OHDACA) Funds .......... 73
 

(2) Commander-in-Chief (CINC) Initiative Funds (CIFs) – 10 USC § 166a (see
 

Appendix D-8)...................................................................................................... 76
 

c. Foreign Disaster Relief Operations Funded From Already
 

Purchased Supplies, Equipment and Services................................... 77
 (1) Special Presidential Drawdown Authority – 22 U.S.C. § 2318(a)(2) (Foreign
 

Assistance Act § 506(a)(2)) (see Appendix D-14)............................................... 77
 

(2) Donation of Excess Non-Lethal Supplies - 10 U.S.C. § 2547...................... 78
 

3. The rules change with the phases of the operation. ........................... 78
 

4. Space Available Transportation of Relief Supplies (Denton)........... 79
 

5. Use of Cash for Local Purchasing...................................................... 81
 

6. Unauthorized Commitments............................................................... 81
 

7. Contracting Issues............................................................................. 83
 

a. The Contracting Process. .............................................................. 83
 

Figure D-2, The JTF-Aquila Contracting Process........................................ 83
 

b. Use of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold .............................. 83
 

8. Use of Funds for Gifts, Awards, and MWR Activities..................... 84
 

a. Purchase of Awards and Gifts for JTF Personnel ........................ 84
 

b. Purchase of Awards and Gifts for Foreign Dignitaries................ 85
 

c. Use of Funds for MWR Activities ................................................ 86
 

9. Requests for Support to Non-DoD Organizations ............................. 87
 

a. Support to Non-Governmental Organizations............................... 88
 

(1) Movement of Supplies.................................................................................. 88
 

(2) Transport of Aid Workers............................................................................. 88
 

b. Support to Host Nation Military ................................................... 89
 (1) Construction and Improvements for Host Nation Military .......................... 89
 

(2) Requests From Host Nation Military For Personal or Logistical Support ... 90
 

c. Access to Post Exchange (PX) facilities ....................................... 90
 

10. Support to Host Nation Populace ..................................................... 91
 

v 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

a. Donation of Food...........................................................................91
 

b. Medical Services............................................................................92
 

11. Fiscal Issues of Other Agencies........................................................93
 

a. USAID/OFDA ...............................................................................93
 

b. CARE.............................................................................................95
 

E. FORCE PROTECTION ................................................................................97
 

1. Force protection is always an issue. ..................................................97
 

2. Service members must be trained on ROE.........................................98
 

3. ROE can only be modified by the appropriate authority..................100
 

4. Be aware of other specific training required in your AOR............100 

F. LEGAL ASSISTANCE................................................................................102
 

1. Every judge advocate will practice legal assistance.........................102
 

2. Conflicts of interest can arise and create significant issues. ...........102
 

3. Plan to provide cross-theater legal assistance support. ...................104
 

4. Have a strong Soldier Readiness Program (SRP) in place prior to
 

deployments.................................................................................................105
 

5. Incorporate legal assistance issues into predeployment training.....105
 

6. Bring the necessary resources..........................................................105
 

G. CIVIL-ADMINISTRATIVE LAW ...............................................................106
 

1. Real Estate .......................................................................................106
 

a. Base Camp Acquisition ...............................................................106
 

b. Base Camp Maintenance and Improvements..............................107
 

c. Base Camp Closure......................................................................108
 

2. Environmental Lessons.....................................................................109
 

3. Liability Concerns.............................................................................110
 

H. FOREIGN CLAIMS...................................................................................111
 

1. Establish claims procedures as soon as possible. .............................111
 

2. Who pays?.........................................................................................112
 

3. Solatia payments may be an effective way to maintain positive
 

relations with the host nation. .....................................................................113
 

4. Claim forms and instructions in the host nation’s language.............114
 

I. INFORMATION OPERATIONS AND PUBLIC RELATIONS ..........................115
 

1. Information Operations must be integrated into the plan from the
 

beginning.....................................................................................................115
 

2. Information Operations can promote mission accomplishment.......116
 

vi 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

3. Information Operations can promote force protection and security.118 

4. Information Operations must be sensitive to the “politics of
 

compassion.”............................................................................................... 119
 

5. Visitors............................................................................................ 120
 

J. MILITARY JUSTICE................................................................................. 121
 

1. Attempt to resolve UCMJ jurisdiction prior to deployment. .......... 121
 

2. Ensure you have adequate Trial Defense Service (TDS) support
 

before you deploy. ...................................................................................... 122
 

3. JAs must be prepared to assist commanders with mission-specific
 

regulations. ........................................................................................... 123
 

K. PERSONNEL, TRAINING AND EQUIPMENT............................................. 125
 

1. Prepare for deployment now. .......................................................... 125
 

2. Prepare a legal support plan for the operation................................. 126
 

a. Conduct Legal Preparation of the Battlefield (LPB) and METT-TC
 

(Mission, “Enemy,” Time, Troops, Terrain and Civilians) analyses.
 

......................................................................................................... 128
 

b. Task organize. ............................................................................. 128
 (1) Consider the size of the area of operations and obstacles to travel and
 

communication. ................................................................................................. 130
 

(2) Remember key cells and operating groups: the DJTFAC. ......................... 131
 

c. Choose the right JAs and 71Ds for the mission. ........................ 131
 (1) Consider deploying the JAs and 71Ds organic to the task force units. ...... 131
 

(2) Consider special qualifications specific to the operation. .......................... 132
 

(3) JAs must be “jacks of all trades.” ............................................................... 132
 

(4) Properly Integrate 71Ds.............................................................................. 134
 

d. Establish a JA technical chain..................................................... 136
 

e. Check the TPFDL (Time Phased Force Deployment List)......... 137
 

3. Conduct a predeployment training program..................................... 138
 

4. Bring the resources, equipment, materials you need into theater. .. 139
 

a. Vehicles ....................................................................................... 140
 

b. Communications.......................................................................... 140
 

c. Resources and References .......................................................... 142

 5. Personnel Transition ........................................................................ 142

 6. Redeployment .................................................................................. 143
 

L. RESERVE COMPONENTS ........................................................................ 145
 

1. Outline of the Operations ................................................................. 145
 

a. Phase I: The Emergency Phase .................................................. 145
 

b. Phase II: The Rehabilitation Phase ............................................ 146
 

vii 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

c. Phase III: The Restoration Phase (Expd. NEW HORIZONS) ...147
 (1) NH Honduras-01, 13 Feb thru 8 May 1999 (JTF Sula)............................. 150
 

(2) NH Honduras-02, 21 Feb thru 8 Aug 1999 (JTF Aguan Arrow) ............... 150
 

(3) NH Guatemala 99-I, 8 Feb thru 5 Jun 1999 (JTF San Marcos).................. 151
 

(4) NH Guatemala 99-II, 15 May thru 9 Aug 1999 (JTF Montagua) .............. 151
 

(5) NH El Salvador, 30 Mar thru 16 Aug 1999 (JTF New Hope).................... 152
 

(6) NH Nicaragua, 17 Apr thru 4 Sep 1999 (JTF Esteli) ................................. 152
 

(7) NH Dominican Republic, 2 Apr thru 6 Aug 1999 (JTF Carib. Castle)...... 152
 

(8) Forward Command Element (FCE), 13 Mar thru 1 Sep 1999.................... 153
 

2. Reserve Component-Unique Lessons Learned.................................153
 

a. Reserve JAs will be required to provide support in all core legal
 

disciplines. .......................................................................................154
 (1) Military Justice ........................................................................................... 154
 

(2) Administrative and Civil Law .................................................................... 156
 

(3) Legal Assistance ......................................................................................... 157
 

b. Logs and continuity files are essential for JA transitions............158
 

c. Summanry. ..................................................................................158
 

APPENDICES 

INTRO-1. EFFECTS OF HURRICANE MITCH....................................................161
 

INTRO-2. DEPLOYMENT ORDER....................................................................162
 

INTRO-3. DEPLOYMENT ORDER MODIFICATION...........................................167
 

INTRO-4. DEPLOYMENT ORDER MODIFICATION 02. .....................................170
 

INTRO-5. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE MEMORANDUM, SUBJECT: FUNDING
 

ENHANCED NEW HORIZONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE DOMINICAN
 

REBUBLIC.....................................................................................................177
 

INTRO-6. PRESS BRIEFING BY SECRETARY OF THE ARMY LOUIS CALDERA AND
 

COMMANDER AND CHIEF OF SOUTHERN COMMAND GENERAL CHARLES
 

WILHELM .....................................................................................................178
 

INTRO-7. WHITE HOUSE FACT SHEET. .........................................................187
 

INTRO-8. COUNTRY INFORMATION - HONDURAS .........................................190
 

INTRO-9. COUNTRY INFORMATION - GUATEMALA.......................................192
 

INTRO-10. COUNTRY INFORMATION - NICARAGUA. .....................................194
 

INTRO-11. COUNTRY INFORMATION - EL SALVADOR...................................195
 

A. LEGAL PREPARATION OF THE BATTLEFIELD (LPB). ................................196
 

B-1. U.S. MILITARY INVOLVEMENT PROCESS FOR DISASTER RELIEF
 

OPERATIONS (DOMESTIC, FOREIGN AND PDD-56 PROCESS). ......................203
 

B-2. ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ........206
 

viii 

159 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

B-3. ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S.
 

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (USAID), AND THE OFFICE FOR
 

AGENCY (DSCA) AND ITS OFFICE OF HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE AND
 

FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE (OFDA) ................................................... 214
 

B-4. ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS FOR DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION
 

DEMINING (OHAD). .................................................................................... 216
 

B-5. PRESIDENTIAL DECISION DIRECTIVE (PDD) 56 MANAGING COMPLEX
 

CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS. ....................................................................... 218
 

B-6. NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOS) AND PRIVATE
 

ORGANIZATIONS (PVOS). ............................................................................ 225
 

C-1. EXCHANGE OF NOTES (DIPLOMATIC NOTES) - NICARAGUA ................ 244
 

C-2. SEC. OF STATE INSTRUCTIONS ON DIPLOMATIC NOTES........................ 247
 

C-3. GUATEMALA AGREEMENT. .................................................................. 250
 

C-4. HONDURAN EXCHANGE OF NOTES AND CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
 

PROTOCOL.................................................................................................... 255
 

D-1. DRAWDOWN AUTHORITY 1.................................................................. 266
 

D-2. DRAWDOWN AUTHORITY 2.................................................................. 267
 

D-3. NEW PROCUREMENT............................................................................ 268
 

D-4. WITHDRAWL OF OHDACA FUNDS ..................................................... 270
 

D-5. CONTINGENCY OPERATION DESIGNATION ........................................... 272
 

D-6. EXECUTIVE ORDER 12966, FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE .............. 274
 

D-7. 10 USC SEC.127, EMERGENCY AND EXTRAORDINARY EXPENSES...... 275
 

D-8. 10 USC SEC. 166A, COMBATANT COMMANDS: FUNDING THROUGH THE
 

CHAIRMAN OF JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF. ....................................................... 278
 

D-9. 10 USC SEC. 401, HUMANITARIAN AND CIVIC ASSISTANCE PROVIDED IN
 

CONJUNCTION WITH MILITARY OPERATIONS ............................................... 282
 

D-10. 10 USC SEC. 402, TRANSPORTATION OF HUMANITARIAN RELIEF
 

SUPPLIES TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES ............................................................... 289
 

D-11. 10 USC SEC. 404, FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE ......................... 291
 

D-12. 10 USC SEC. 2547, EXCESS NONLETHAL SUPPLIES: HUMANITARIAN
 

RELIEF.......................................................................................................... 292
 

D-13. 10 USC SEC. 2551, HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE. ........................... 294
 

D-14. 22 USC SEC. 2318, SPECIAL AUTHORITY ......................................... 297
 

D-15. JOINT TRAVEL REGULATION EXTRACT .............................................. 300
 

D-16. ARMY REGULATION 37-47 EXTRACT - USES OF OFFICIAL
 

REPRESENTATION FUNDS ............................................................................. 305
 

D-17. ARMY REGULATION 600-8-22 EXTRACT - MILITARY AWARDS......... 310
 

D-18. THE DENTON PROGRAM .................................................................... 313
 

ix 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

D-19. USIA NEWS ARTICLE ........................................................................316
 

D-20. FEDERATION OF THE RED CROSS SITUATION REPORT NO. 2...............318
 

D-21. USAID/OFDA HURRICANE MITCH FACT SHEET #4. ........................325
 

D-22. USAID/OFDA HURRICANE MITCH FACT SHEET #11 .......................330
 

D-23. USAID/OFDA HURRICANE MITCH FACT SHEET #22 .......................335
 

E-1. JTF AGUILA POLICY LETTER #4, FORCE PROTECTION .........................343
 

E-2. U.S. SOUTHCOM HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY AND PROCEDURES ..........348
 

E-3. U.S. SOUTHCOM STANDING ROE FOR DEPLOYED FORCES..............374
 

E-4. JTF AGUILA MEMORANDUM, SUBJECT: OFF LIMITS AREAS ON
 

COMALAPA AIR BASE...................................................................................375
 

E-5. JTF AGUILA POLICY LETTER #4, VEHICLE MOVEMENT OUTSIDE THE
 

DESIGNATED COMPOUND OF COMALAPA AIR BASE, EL SALVADOR ............377
 

F. ARMY REGULATION 27-26 EXTRACT, RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
 

FOR LAWYERS ..............................................................................................379
 

G-1. DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE USE OF FACILITIES
 

AND REAL ESTATE........................................................................................387
 

G-2. SAMPLE LEASE.....................................................................................389
 

G-3. SAMPLE PRE-POSITIONING MOU.........................................................396
 

G-4. MOA CONCERNING THE WORKING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JTF
 

AGUILA AND SECOND AIR BRIGADE.............................................................398
 

H-1. CLAIMS PROCEDURE MEMORANDUM...................................................400
 

H-2. UNIT CLAIMS OFFICER APPOINTMENT GUIDE......................................402
 

H-3. MEMORANDUM ON SOLATIA PAYMENTS..............................................408
 

I. [INTENITIONALLY LEFT BLANK]...............................................................409
 

J-1. U.S. SOUTHERN COMMAND POLICY MEMORANDUM, CONSUMPTION OF
 

ALCOHOL BY OPERATIONS FORCES DEPLOYED IN SOUTHCOM AOR.......410
 

J-2. JTF AGUILA COMMANDER'S ORDERS REGARDING THE TREATMENT OF
 

CULTURAL OBJECTS.....................................................................................412
 

J-3. JTF AGUILA COMMANDER'S POLICY REGARDING MWR ACTIVITIES...413
 

J-4. JTF AGUILA GENERAL ORDER #1 .........................................................414
 

K-1. HURRICANE MITCH MILITARY RESPONSE TIMELINE............................416
 

K-2. HURRICANE MITCH U.S. GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS TIMELINE ...418
 

K-3. JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA ORGANIZATION........................................420
 

x 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

K-4. JUDGE ADVOCATE DEPLOYMENT ORGANIZATION AND TIMELINE ....... 423
 

K-5. JTF AGUILA CJA CONTINUITY FILE.................................................... 426
 

L-1. RESERVE UNITS PROVIDING LIFT CAPABILITY..................................... 432
 

L-9. INFORMATION PAPER, ARNG PARTICIP. IN NH, MAR 99.................... 447
 

L-10. INFORMATION PAPER, ARNG PARTICIP. IN NH, APR 99................... 450
 

L-2. U.S. SOUTHERN COMMAND POLICY MEMORANDUM, CONSUMPTION OF
 

ALCOHOL BY OPERATIONS FORCES DEPLOYED IN SOUTHCOM AOR ...... 433
 

L-3. NEW HORIZONS HONDURAS-01 JTF SULA .......................................... 434
 

L-4. NEW HORIZONS HONDURAS-02 JTF AGUAN ARROW.......................... 437
 

L-5. NEW HORIZONS DOMINCAN REPUBLIC-02 JTF CARIB. CASTLE .......... 440
 

L-6. NEW HORIZONS NICARAGUA JTF ESTELI ............................................ 443
 

L-7. FORWARD COMMAND ELEMENT (FCE) ............................................... 445
 

L-8. OHIO NATIONAL GUARD JUDGE ADVOCATE ROTATIONS..................... 446
 

M. USEFUL INTERNET SITES FOR FOREIGN DISASTER RELIEF OPERATIONS
 

ROTATIONS .................................................................................................. 453
 

ACKNOWLDGEMENTS........................................................ INSIDE BACK COVER
 

xi 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

xii 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL
 

AMERICA:
 

HURRICANE MITCH RELIEF EFFORTS, 1998-1999
 

LESSONS LEARNED FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES
 

We have before us a panorama of death, desolation, and ruin in 

all of the national territory. We are making an urgent call on 

the international community....1 

President Carlos Flores Facusse 

Honduras 

I. INTRODUCTION 

Human suffering and destruction of property are inevitable when the 

forces of nature deliver sustained winds of over 180 miles per hour and 

torrential rain of over 20 inches per day for four days. The tropical storm 

that became known as Hurricane Mitch was one of the worst storms to strike 

Central America this century, claiming thousands of lives and billions of 

dollars worth of property.2 

The response from the United States to the urgent humanitarian needs 

of the region was extraordinary. The Departments of Defense and State, the 

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other federal and 

charitable organizations mobilized prior to the Hurricane making landfall, 

and initiated an immediate relief effort. 

This report reflects the experiences of judge advocates and 

representatives of other federal and non-governmental agencies, who 

participated in the Hurricane Mitch disaster relief effort in Central America. 

1

 1 PATRICK E. MURRAY, HISTORIAN, TWELFTH AIR FORCE AIR COMBAT COMMAND, HURRICANE MITCH 

AND U.S. AIR FORCE PARTICIPATION IN THE DISASTER RESPONSE, OCTOBER 1998-FEBRUARY 1999 

[hereinafter AIR FORCE AAR] (on file with CLAMO) (citing President Flores Calls on the International 

Community for Help, HONDURAS THIS WEEK ONLINE, Nov. 1998, at 2). 

2

 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 1998 HURRICANE SEASON WRAP-UP (visited 

Mar. 14, 2000) <http://www.outlook.noaa.gov/98hurricanes>. 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Many of the judge advocates tasked with supporting the relief effort found 

themselves without helpful references. This report is intended to provide 

judge advocates with a starting point for foreign disaster support operations. 

The Center for Law and Military Operations held its first inter-agency 

After Action Review (AAR) in April 1999 at The Judge Advocate General’s 

School, Army, Charlottesville, Virginia. 3 The AAR included 

representatives of: 

The U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps 

The U.S. Air Force Judge Advocate General’s Department 

The U.S. Army Peacekeeping Institute 

U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) 

The Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Civil Military 

Operations, USARSO 

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency 

The Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining, OSD 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) 

Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) 

The Institute for Defense Analysis (IDA) 

CARE 

This publication is based on presentations given, insights offered, and 

material provided, during the AAR; interviews of deployed judge advocates, 

legal specialists, and other participants; and after action reports produced by 

judge advocates, legal offices, and other agencies involved in the relief 

effort. 

A major reason for this book and for the Center for Law and 

Military Operations’ interagency After Action Review of 

Hurricane Mitch is to promote integration and coordination 

among the military, government organizations and agencies, 

and non-governmental and private organizations in foreign 

disaster relief and other operations. 

Colonel David E. Graham 

Director, Center for Law and Military Operations 

3

 The AAR was conducted at The Judge Advocate General’s School, U.S. Army, Charlottesville, Virginia, 

April 23-24, 1999. A verbatim transcript, videotape of the AAR and Power Point presentations are on file 

at CLAMO. Citations to the AAR are based on the transcript. 

2 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

II. THE OPERATIONAL CONTEXT 

A. THE HURRICANE 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) calls 

the 1998 Atlantic region hurricane season “the deadliest in more than 200 

years...” 4 This distinction was due in large part to Hurricane Mitch. Mitch, 

“a Category 5 monster,” 5 claimed an estimated 11,000 lives,6

 logged 

sustained winds near 180 miles per hour (mph) and brought gusts over 200 

mph. It was the fourth most intense hurricane observed in the Atlantic this 

century.7 

Figure Intro-1, Hurricane Map, 26 Oct 98. 

4

 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 1998 HURRICANE SEASON WRAP-UP (visited 

Mar. 14, 2000) <http://www.outlook.noaa.gov/98hurricanes>. 

5

 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 1998 HURRICANE SEASON WRAP-UP (visited 

Mar. 14, 2000) <http://www.outlook.noaa.gov/98hurricanes>. 

6 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 1998 HURRICANE ACTIVITY FOR THE NORTH 

ATLANTIC, CARIBBEAN SEA AND GULF OF MEXICO (Nov. 30, 1998) (visited Apr. 12, 2000) 

<http://www.outlook.noaa.gov/98hurricanes/hilites.html>. 

7

 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 1998 HURRICANE SEASON WRAP-UP (visited 

Mar. 14, 2000) <http://www.outlook.noaa.gov/98hurricanes>. 

3 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

An organizing cloud pattern was observed in the southwest Caribbean 

Sea approximately 360 miles south of Kingston, Jamaica on 21 October 

1998. Mitch became a tropical depression on 22 October, and strengthened 

to a tropical storm later that day. Mitch was classified a hurricane on 24 

October, then moved toward the west and began to intensify rapidly. At its 

peak intensity on 26 October, Mitch's maximum one-minute sustained 

surface winds were estimated to be 180 mph – a Category 5 hurricane on the 

Saffir/Simpson Hurricane scale.8 

Figure Intro-2, Hurricane Map, 29 Oct 98. 

The center of Hurricane Mitch drifted toward the north coast of 

Honduras, battering the Bay Islands. The storm appeared to stall, but then 

moved southward and inland, weakening to a tropical storm on 30 October. 

Mitch moved slowly over Honduras and Guatemala on 30-31 October, while 

gradually weakening to a tropical depression, but still generating “torrential 

rains over portions of Honduras and Nicaragua where the associated floods 

8

 JOHN L. GUINEY AND MILES B. LAWRENCE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 

PRELIMINARY REPORT, HURRICANE MITCH, 22 OCTOBER - 05 NOVEMBER 1998 (Jan. 28, 1999) 

<http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/1998mitch.html>. 

4 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

were devastating.”9

 Heavy rains also occurred in neighboring countries, 

particularly Guatemala and El Salvador, with locally heavy rain over 

portions of Belize and Southeastern Mexico.10 

Honduras was the hardest hit, loosing well over 6,000 people, 90% of 

its banana crop, and 170 bridges.11 On 2 November, Honduran President 

Carlos Flores Facusse issued a plea for help: “We have before us a 

panorama of death, desolation, and ruin in all of the national territory. We 

are making an urgent call on the international community....”12 The U.S. 

military and diplomatic communities were already responding to the 

tragedy. The U.S. Ambassador to Honduras had declared a disaster five 

days prior to the Honduran President’s request; the U.S. Army and Air Force 

were flying relief missions by the time President Flores issued his plea. 

B. THE RESPONSE 

1. The Immediate Response 

The U.S. response to the suffering caused by Hurricane Mitch was 

unprecedented. The Department of Defense, the U.S. Agency for 

International Development (USAID), and the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) responded to the disaster, at a total cost of over $300 

million. 

Joint Task Force Bravo (JTF-BRAVO) had been based at Soto Cano 

Airbase in Honduras since 1983. In 1998, approximately 450 JTF-BRAVO 

personnel shared Soto Cano with the Honduran Air Force. JTF-BRAVO 

had a standing-Civic/Humanitarian Affairs cell, which had a relationship 

with the U.S. Embassy in Tegucigalpa, Honduras and with local 

governmental agencies. For years, the joint task force had coordinated New 

9

 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 1998 HURRICANE ACTIVITY FOR THE NORTH 

ATLANTIC, CARIBBEAN SEA AND GULF OF MEXICO (Nov. 30, 1998) (visited Apr. 12, 2000) 

<http://www.outlook.noaa.gov/98hurricanes/hilites.html>. 

10 JOHN L. GUINEY AND MILES B. LAWRENCE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 

PRELIMINARY REPORT, HURRICANE MITCH, 22 OCTOBER - 05 NOVEMBER 1998 (Jan. 28, 1999) 

<http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/1998mitch.html>. 

11 U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, EFFECTS OF HURRICANE MITCH OCTOBERNOVEMBER, 1998 (at Appendix Intro-1). 

12 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1. 

5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Horizons exercises, a deployment training program that produced roads, 

bridges, schools, water wells, and clinics in Honduras.13 

The World Food Program and CARE kept approximately 60,000 

metric tons of food for on-going programs positioned at La Mesa 

International Airport near San Pedro Sula in Northern Honduras.14 Soto 

Cano and La Mesa airports would become key staging areas for the relief 

effort. 

By 26 October, JTF-BRAVO and the 24th Air Wing at Howard Air 

Force Base in Panama were on alert. JTF-BRAVO prepared to serve as an 

intermediate staging base, prepositioning equipment, activating an 

emergency operations center, and coordinating with USAID’s Office of U.S. 

Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA). The 24th Wing had four C130s and two C-27s alerted to support potential operations in Honduras.15 

On 27 October, the U.S. Ambassador to Honduras declared a disaster, 

allowing immediate access to U.S. disaster response funding. 

USAID/OFDA immediately channeled $125,000 to the USAID Mission in 

Honduras for local purchase of relief supplies.16 At this point, it appeared 

Honduras had been spared the brunt of the hurricane, and the region braced 

for its impact on Belize. “There was a premature sense of relief that 

Honduras had been spared....”17 Still, JTF-BRAVO personnel and local 

agencies continued to plan. On 29 October, Hurricane Mitch moved 

southwesterly over Honduras and Guatemala. As the Hurricane moved 

inland, it slowed, pouring “torrents of rain for five straight days.”18 

Soto Cano Airbase was now in danger itself. Task Force personnel 

struggled to save the electric power plant on base, which was necessary if 

Soto Cano was to serve as the intermediate staging base for relief operations. 

Personnel filled sandbags, and purchased coffee bags and more sand when 

13 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 8. 

14 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 7. 

15 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 9-10. 

16 U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, CENTRAL AMERICA – HURRICANE MITCH FACT 

SHEET #4 (Nov. 2, 1998) (visited Mar. 14, 2000) <http://www.reliefweb.int>. 

17 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 10. 

18 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 12. 

6 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

the supply on hand proved insufficient.19 The JTF-BRAVO commander 

remarked “It was very interesting, and you felt a lot of pride in watching 

helicopter pilots, firemen, doctors, lawyers, contractors—everbody—out 

filling sandbags.”20 Before the end of 29 October, all the airfields in 

northern Honduras, except Soto Cano, were under water.21 

By 31 October, despite flooding at Soto Cano, the first segment of the 

24th Wing arrived from Panama. On 1 November, the weather permitted 

local flying, and JTF-BRAVO sent UH-60s to conduct initial assessments. 

They reported devastation, extensive flooding, and impassable highways. 

UH-60 Blackhawks from the U.S. Army’s 228th Aviation Battalion flew 

rescue missions to save local citizens stranded on rooftops and in trees.22 C130s and C-27s flew five relief missions to airdrop 100 cases of MealsReady-to-Eat (MREs) and blankets to victims.23 

USAID/OFDA provided funding for the assessment and rescue 

flights, and arranged for commercial airlifts of relief into Honduras. The 

first relief supplies arrived by air on 31 October and 1 November. USAID 

also allocated $200,000 to the USAID Mission in Honduras and $400,000 to 

local PVOs for the purchase of relief supplies. 

Emergency disaster assistance also began in neighboring countries.24 

On 2 November, two U.S. Blackhawks and one U.S. Chinook, funded by 

USAID, joined the search and rescue efforts in Nicaragua. (See section 

III.D.10. Fiscal Issues of Other Agencies for a discussion of funding of U.S. 

military operations by other agencies.) USAID/OFDA also prepositioned 

funding in Guatemala and El Salvador, and arranged for movement of relief 

supplies into those countries.25 

19 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 13. 350 JTF-BRAVO personnel, Honduran workers, local militia 

soldiers, and civilian contractors worked round-the-clock for four days to protect the power generators. 

20 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 13-14. 

21 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 15. 

22AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 16. 

23 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 16. 

24 U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, CENTRAL AMERICA – HURRICANE MITCH FACT 

SHEET #4 (Nov. 2, 1998) (visited Mar. 14, 2000) <http://www.reliefweb.int>. 

25 U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, CENTRAL AMERICA – HURRICANE MITCH FACT 

SHEET #4 (Nov. 2, 1998) (visited Mar. 14, 2000) <http://www.reliefweb.int>. 

7 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

The USAID/OFDA Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), led 

by OFDA’s Senior Regional Advisor in Costa Rica, coordinated support 

with the affected countries. Once JTF-BRAVO and OFDA conducted initial 

damage assessments, the real magnitude of the storm became apparent. 

Disaster relief operations and humanitarian assistance would be much larger 

in scope and take far longer than initially anticipated.26 

2. Operation Fuerte Apoyo (“Strong Support”) 

Military Operations in Central America fall under the United States 

Southern Command (SOUTHCOM).27 After receiving disaster assessments, 

the Commander in Chief, SOUTHCOM (CINCSO) requested, and the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) issued, a deployment order for 

disaster relief operations.28 A CJCS message dated 5 November 1998 

contained the first deployment order for units to augment JTF-BRAVO.29 

On 6 November, President Clinton directed the drawdown of up to $30 

million worth of articles and services from the inventory and resources of 

the Department of Defense in support of relief operations.30 

Because JTF-BRAVO was immersed in relief operations in Honduras, 

SOUTHCOM formed Joint Task Force Aguila (JTF-A) (or “Eagle” in 

English) on 10 November 1998, to conduct humanitarian relief and disaster 

assistance in Nicaragua, Guatemala, and El Salvador. On 13 November 

1998, the JTF-A commander deployed with the Deployable Joint Task Force 

Augmentation Cell (DJTFAC) to establish JTF-A in El Salvador.31 A 

26 U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, CENTRAL AMERICA – HURRICANE MITCH FACT 

SHEET #4 (Nov. 2, 1998) (visited Mar. 14, 2000) <http://www.reliefweb.int>. 

27 The United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) Headquarters is located in Miami, Florida. 

Marine General Charles E. Wilhelm was the Commander in Chief, SOUTHCOM, during the relief effort. 

SOUTHCOM components are the 12th Air Force, U.S. Army South, Marine Forces South and U.S. 

Atlantic Fleet. 

28 AIR FORCE AAR, supra note 1, at 19. 

29 See Message, 052023Z Nov 98, CJCS, Washington DC, subject: Deployment Order (5 Nov. 1998) (text 

of message is at Appendix Intro-2). 

30 This authorization was issued under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 22 U.S.C. §2318 (a)(2), through 

Presidential Determination 99-03. On Nov. 14, 1998, President Clinton authorized the drawdown of an 

additional $45 million through Presidential Determination 99-04. 

31 LTC Jeffrey Addicott, SOUTHCOM Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, SOUTCOM, Address at the Center 

for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). PowerPoint slide #7 notes. COL(P)Virgil L. Packet, the 

Assistant Division Commander for Support of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), from Ft. 

Campbell, Kentucky, served as the JTF-A commander. 

8 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

Nicaragua 

Guatemala 

Comalapa 

Acajutla 

Guatemala 

City 

Managua 

JTF-A 

TF TF 

TF 

San José 

Corinto 

DoD 

Hurricane Mitch Response 

El Salvador 

Honduras 

Costa Rica 

Belize 

JTF-B 

Soto Cano 

Panama 

Bay Islands 

Figure Intro-3, JTF A and JTF-Bravo Locations.
 

subsequent deployment order, dated 16 November 1998, authorized
 

deployment of units to join the new JTF.32 The Joint Operations Area for 

JTF–Aguila covered over 100,000 square miles. 

JTF-A33 formed Task Forces in El Salvador,34 Nicaragua,35 and 

Guatemala.36 JTF-A headquarters was co-located with TF-El Salvador. The 

32 See Message, 0161415Z Nov 98, CJCS, Washington DC, subject: Deployment Order (16 Nov. 1998) 

(text of message is at Appendix Intro-4). 

33 JTF Aguila consisted of Headquarters,. 593rd Combat Support Group, 1 POG, 46th CSG (ABN)(JLC), 

55th Medical Group (JMC), 93rd Signal Brigade, 2/350 Civil Affairs TAC Support, HOC (USARSO) (See 

Appendix K-3). 

34 Task Force El Salvador consisted of Headquarters, 593rd Combat Support Group, 7-101 Aviation 

Detachment, CSSD 69(HQ)(USMC), 621st AMG TALCE MOG (USAF) (See Appendix K-3). 

35 Task Force Nicaragua consisted of Headquarters, 36TH Engineer Group, 46th (Combat Heavy) Engineer 

Battalion, 93rd Signal Detachment, 96th Civil Affairs Tactical Support Team, 7-101 Aviation Detachment, 

189th LTF (CSB)(TACON), 261st Medical Battalion (-) (TACON) (See Appendix K-3). 

9 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

disaster relief operation was titled Operation Fuerte Apoyo (“Strong 

Support”). SOUTHCOM assigned forces from U.S. Army South 

(USARSO),37 Special Operations Command, South (SOCSO), and the 24th 

Wing. These forces were placed under the tactical control of the 

Commanders, JTF-BRAVO and JTF-A to conduct life saving operations, 

deliver emergency relief supplies, and provide medical assistance. 

The key implementation arms for military engagement in foreign 

nations are the Defense Attaché Offices (DAOs) and Military Liaison 

Groups (MILGRPs), which work out of the United States embassies and 

report to the local United States Ambassador as well as USSOUTHCOM. 

The DAOs and MILGRPs conduct the military-to-military contact between 

most countries. Nicaragua had a DAO, but no MILGRP. This made 

coordination of the relief effort more difficult in Nicaragua in the initial 

phases. 

3. The Phased Operation 

USSOUTHCOM conducted the relief operation in three phases: 

Phase I - The Emergency Phase (28 October – 28 November 1998) 

Phase II - The Rehabilitation Phase (28 November 1998 – 20 

February 1999) 

Phase III - The Restoration Phase (28 February – September 1999) 

a. Phase I – The Emergency Phase 

During Phase I, JTF-BRAVO conducted initial area assessments and 

disaster assessments, as discussed above. SOUTHCOM focused on 

augmenting JTF-BRAVO, creating JTF-A, and providing emergency relief 

supplies. Phase I operations created a variety of fiscal issues, discussed in 

section III.D. Fiscal Law. 

36 Task Force Guatemala consisted of Headquarters, 819/820 RED HORSE Squadrons, 819th/820th RED 

HORSE Squadrons (-), 264th LTF (CSB)(TACON), 1-159 Aviation Detachment, A/2D Medical Battalion 

(USMC)(TACON) Task Force El Salvador, 93rd Signal Detachment, 1/350 Civil Affairs Tactical Support 

Team (See Appendix K-3). 

37 United States Army South (USARSO) is currently located in San Juan, Puerto Rico. During Hurricane 

Mitch, USARSO was in the process of moving from Panama to Puerto Rico. 

10 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

During Phase I, JTF-BRAVO rescued approximately 700 people and 

delivered over 2.5 million pounds of food, almost 70,000 gallons of water, 

and almost 95,000 pounds of medical supplies.38 SOUTHCOM deployed 39 

rotary and six fixed-wing aircraft, along with a Naval Special Operations 

unit from Panama. The aircraft flew more than 1,000 hours. The Navy unit 

was equipped with ten Zodiac rubber boats, which were used for rescue 

operations. SOUTHCOM’s Phase I operations cost approximately $35 

million.39 

Airlift of supplies and personnel into the AOR was provided primarily 

by U.S. Reserve component and Air National Guard assets.40 Air Guard, Air 

Force Reserve, and Naval Reserve units flew at least 56 support flights, 

transporting over 780 tons of cargo. The Air Guard assigned to Panama 

flew more than 100 relief flights, transporting over 475 passengers and 620 

tons of supplies.41 

The DJTFAC, which arrived on 13 November 1998, established the 

operational base for JTF –A. It consisted primarily of planners, who 

prepared for the arrival of the JTF units. JTF-A headquarters was 

established on Comalapa Air Base, El Salvador.42 The DJTFAC developed 

the mission framework and wrote the JTF Operations Order. 

The Commander’s intent was to restore critical ground lines of 

communication; support host nation efforts to relieve near term human 

suffering; set the conditions to facilitate long term regional recovery; and to 

conduct operations with country-tailored task forces. In Nicaragua, JTF 

Aguila’s main effort would be focused at the national level. In El Salvador, 

efforts were focused at local levels and in Guatemala, efforts were focused at 

38DoD Moves to Next Phase of Hurricane Mitch Relief Effort, DEFENSELINK NEWS SERVICE (Nov. 19, 

1998) (visited Apr. 13, 2000) <http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov1998/b11191998_bt602-98.html>. 

39DoD Moves to Next Phase of Hurricane Mitch Relief Effort, DEFENSELINK NEWS SERVICE (Nov. 19, 

1998) (visited Apr. 13, 2000) <http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov1998/b11191998_bt602-98.html>. 

40DoD Moves to Next Phase of Hurricane Mitch Relief Effort, DEFENSELINK NEWS SERVICE (Nov. 19, 

1998) (visited Apr. 13, 2000) <http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov1998/b11191998_bt602-98.html>. 

41DoD Moves to Next Phase of Hurricane Mitch Relief Effort, DEFENSELINK NEWS SERVICE (Nov. 19, 

1998) (visited Apr. 13, 2000) <http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov1998/b11191998_bt602-98.html>. 

42 Comalapa Air Base is located 50 kilometers south of the capital of El Salvador, San Salvador, and shares 

its main runway with the San Salvador International Airport. The forward operating bases included TF El 

Salvador, TF Guatemala and TF Nicaragua. See Appendix G-2 for the Memorandum of Understanding for 

the Use of Facilities and Real Estate on Comalapa Air Base, El Salvador. 

11 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

municipal levels. The JTF Humanitarian Operations Center (HOC) was to 

coordinate at the national level and was the link with private voluntary 

organizations (PVOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and relief 

agencies. 

b. Phase II – The Rehabilitation Phase 

The primary focus for Phase II was repair to infrastructure with a view 

toward returning national capabilities to provide for health and basic welfare 

of the population. During Phase II, the number of DoD personnel 

quadrupled, from 1,300 to more than 5,400.43 Available helicopters 

increased from 39 to over 50. 

During Phase II, U.S. forces performed over 200 strategic airlifts, 

moving over 8,000 short tons of equipment. Fifty-three rotary and ten fixed 

wing aircraft flew over 5,000 hours, transporting over eight million pounds 

of supplies and one million gallons of water.44 Eleven Military Sealift 

Command Vessels conducted the most extensive sealift since Desert Storm, 

moving over 650,000 square feet of equipment and supplies.45 

Engineer teams rebuilt roads and bridges, restored power, repaired 

schools and clinics, and drilled wells. Medical teams fought to control 

disease and vectors, monitored food and water safety, assisted in sanitation 

projects, cared for domestic animals, and conducted epidemiological 

46 surveys. 

43 DoD Moves to Next Phase of Hurricane Mitch Relief Effort, DEFENSELINK NEWS SERVICE (Nov. 19, 

1998) (visited Apr. 13, 2000) <http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov1998/b11191998_bt602-98.html>. 

Deployed units included portions of the II Marine Expeditionary Force, the Marine Corps 2d Force Service 

Support Group, the Marine Corps 8th Engineer Support Battalion, Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 7 

(SEABEES), the Army 1st Corps Support Command of 18th Airborne Corps, Army 539th Corps Support 

Group, Air Force 819th Civil Engineering Squadron (Red Horse), Air Force 820thCivil Engineering 

Squadron (Red Horse), Army 55thEngineer Company (Medium Girder Bridge), Army 46th Engineer 

Battalion, Army Headquarters of 36thEngineer Group, Army 63d Combat Support Equipment Company, 

Army 68th Combat Support Equipment Company, and numerous guard and reserve units. 

44 LTC Jeffrey Addicott, SOUTHCOM Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, SOUTCOM, Address at the Center 

for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). PowerPoint slide #8 notes. 

45 LTC Jeffrey Addicott, SOUTHCOM Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, SOUTCOM, Address at the Center 

for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). PowerPoint slide #8 notes. 

46 LTC Jeffrey Addicott, SOUTHCOM Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, SOUTCOM, Address at the Center 

for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). PowerPoint slide #8 notes. 

12 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

c. Phase III – The Restoration Phase 

During this phase, SOUTHCOM moved from disaster relief to 

infrastructure reconstruction. The reconstruction effort was conducted 

through the Humanitarian and Civic Assistance (HCA) program and the 

CJCS New Horizons exercises.47 New Horizons is a series of on-going 

exercises in Central America begun in the mid-1980s to provide training to 

U.S. military personnel, with an ancillary benefit to the host nation. New 

Horizons is designed to improve joint training readiness of U.S. engineer, 

medical and support units by providing opportunities for these units to hone 

their skills. Authorized activities include rudimentary construction of 

schools and clinics, well drilling, road and bridge improvements, and 

medical treatment of the host nation population. 

Two New Horizons exercises were planned prior to the hurricane: 

Honduras 01 (13 February - 30 June) and Guatemala 01 (8 February – 3 

May). Enhanced New Horizons (ENH) was created to extend the Hurricane 

Mitch relief effort by offering training opportunities to a greater number of 

Reserve and National Guard units. Supplemental appropriations by the U.S. 

Congress provided funding for the unscheduled additions. Five additional 

exercises were scheduled to complete ENH: Honduras 2 (20 February – 21 

August), Nicaragua (1 April – 15 August), El Salvador (30 March – 1 

August), Dominican Republic (1 April – 7 August), and Guatemala 2 (1 

May – 30 August). These exercises are discussed in more detail in Section 

IV.L., Reserve Component Lessons Learned. 

CINCSO established a Forward Command Element to coordinate the 

exercises outside Honduras, with a National Guard brigadier general in 

command and a U.S. Army Reserve colonel as Deputy Commander. JTFBRAVO coordinated the Honduras exercises. The National Guard led 

Honduras 1 and 2, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic. The USAR led 

Guatemala 1 and 2 and El Salvador.48 

47 See section III.L.1.c. Phase III: The restoration Phase (Expanded New Horizons) (for a more detailed 

explanation of the new Horizons exercises). 

48 COL Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, PowerPoint presentation on 

Expanded New Horizons, slide 6 (on file with CLAMO). 

13 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

The ENH exercises involved 20,300 soldiers from 236 National Guard 

and USAR units.49 The purpose of the exercises was training for the 

designated units. Rehabilitated infrastructure was an ancillary benefit to the 

host nations.50 Repair projects during ENH included 23 schools, 9 clinics, 

17 wells, 4 bridges, and 27 medical exercises.51 Expanded New Horizons 

has been completed. Traditional New Horizons exercises will continue. 

49 COL Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, PowerPoint presentation on 

Expanded New Horizons, slide 6 (on file with CLAMO). These totals include 126 National Guard units 

from 41 states and 110 USAR units, and 12,600 National Guard soldiers and 7,700 USAR soldiers. 

50 COL Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, PowerPoint presentation on 

Expanded New Horizons, slide 5 (on file with CLAMO). 

51 COL Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, PowerPoint presentation on 

Expanded New Horizons, slide 6 (on file with CLAMO). 

14 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

III. NON-MILITARY PARTICIPANTS IN FOREIGN DISASTER RELIEF 

OPERATIONS 

When a disaster of large proportions occurs, the entire international 

humanitarian relief community can activate to respond, to include United 

Nations humanitarian organizations, international organizations, private 

voluntary organizations, non-governmental organizations, donor agencies, 

host governments and ministries, and governmental organizations and the 

militaries of various nations. These agencies must work together to ensure 

an efficient response to the crisis. Typically, interagency coordination 

proves difficult, as organizations begin to work together for the first time. 

Such was the case during the Hurricane Mitch response. 

Judge advocates reported that they did not understand the roles and 

working relationships between the military and other U.S. agencies when 

they deployed. They also lacked sufficient understanding of the capabilities 

of non-governmental and private voluntary organizations. This chapter is 

designed to acquaint judge advocates with the roles of the various 

organizations they may encounter during foreign disaster relief missions. It 

is neither a complete nor a definitive guide, but rather an overview. A basic 

understanding of these organizations is critical to understanding the lessons 

learned which follow in Section IV. 

“Government Organizations” (GOs) are official arms of government. 

The USAID and the U.S. Army are both United States GOs. The term GO 

may apply to the agencies of other governments as well. However, when 

used in this book, the term will refer to United States Government 

organizations and offices unless otherwise stated. 

Non-Governmental organizations (NGOs) are citizen’s voluntary 

organizations organized nationally or internationally. They are typically 

non-profit organizations. Some are active in information and education. 

Others are operationally engaged in technical projects, relief, refugee and 

development programs. The term NGO is sometimes used to refer to 

European organizations.52 The term Private Voluntary Organization (PVO) 

is generally used to refer to U.S.-based, tax-exempt, non-profit organizations 

52 See Mr. Peter D. R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), 

Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). 

15 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

involved in international humanitarian efforts such as relief, development, 

refugee assistance, environmental protection, education and public policy. 

In practice, the terms NGO and PVO are sometimes used interchangeably. 

International Organizations (IOs) are organizations such as the 

International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the International 

Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC) and International Organization for 

Migration (IOM). The United Nations (UN) also has several relief-focused 

agencies, such as United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), United 

Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the World 

Food Program (WFP). 

A more detailed description of some of the IOs, PVOs and NGOs is at 

Appendix B-6: International Organizations (IOs), Non-Governmental 

Organizations (NGOs), and Private Organizations (PVOs). The critical 

U.S. GOs and representative PVOs are discussed below to better acquaint 

judge advocates with their roles and responsibilities. 

A. GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS 

The key U.S. government organizations in foreign disaster relief 

operations are: 

•	 The Department of State (DOS) and the embassy or mission in the 

affected nations. 

•	 USAID/OFDA: The Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance 

(OFDA) is a part of The U.S. Agency for International 

Development (USAID). 

•	 DSCA/HA/D: The Office of Humanitarian Assistance and 

Demining (HA/D) is a sub-component of The Defense Security and 

Cooperation Agency (DSCA). 

•	 USDA: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 

1. Department of State (DOS) 

The DOS advises the President in the formulation and execution of 

foreign policy. Its primary mission in the conduct of foreign relations is to 

16 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

promote the interests of the United States overseas. The DOS also has a 

support role in disaster or environmental assistance events or domestic 

counterdrug operations having international implications. The DOS must 

approve all Humanitarian and Civic Assistance (HCA) initiatives. (The 

HCA program is discussed in greater detail below under e. Office of 

Humanitarian Assistance and Demining (HA/D), Defense Security 

Cooperation Agency (DSCA)). When a disaster exceeds a foreign nation’s 

response capacity, that nation can request assistance from the U.S. through 

the U.S. Ambassador or Chief of Mission. The U.S. Ambassador or Chief of 

Mission may declare a disaster and request assistance from USAID/OFDA 

through the Department of State. 

2. The U.S. Embassy for the Affected Nation 

The ambassador (or U.S. Chief of Mission) must approve all U.S. 

activity in the host nation. U.S. government agencies may not conduct 

foreign disaster relief activities in a particular nation until the ambassador 

officially declares a disaster. A chief of mission may declare a disaster if (1) 

the host nation government has requested or will accept U.S. assistance, (2) 

the magnitude of the disaster is beyond the host nation government’s ability 

to respond adequately; and (3) it is in the interest of the U.S. Government to 

respond. During Hurricane Mitch, U.S. chiefs of mission in the affected 

countries declared disasters in accordance with established Department of 

State procedures. See Appendix K-2: Hurricane Mitch U.S. Government 

Organizations Timeline for specific declaration times. 

3. United States Agency for International Development (USAID) 

USAID is responsible for implementing U.S. foreign economic and 

humanitarian assistance programs. USAID is an independent federal 

government agency that operates under the foreign policy guidance of the 

Department of State. USAID's history goes back to the Marshall Plan for 

the reconstruction of Europe after World War Two and the Truman 

Administration's Point Four Program. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy 

signed the Foreign Assistance Act into law and created USAID by executive 

order. Since that time, USAID has been the principal U.S. agency that 

17 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

extends assistance to countries recovering from disaster, trying to escape 

poverty, and engaging in democratic reforms.53 

USAID is responsible for the administration of the Foreign Assistance 

Act functions including foreign disaster relief. The Administrator of the 

USAID is the President’s Special Coordinator for International Disaster 

Response, whose duty is to “promote maximum effectiveness and 

coordination in responses to foreign disasters by U.S. agencies and between 

the U.S. and other donors.”54 The agency works in six principle areas 

crucial to achieving both sustainable development and advancing U.S. 

foreign policy objectives: 

(1) Economic growth and agricultural development 

(2) Population, health and nutrition 

(3) Environment 

(4) Democracy and governance 

(5) Education and training 

(6) Humanitarian assistance 

USAID is headed by an Administrator and Deputy Administrator, 

both appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. In 

Washington, USAID's major organization units are called bureaus. Each 

bureau houses the staffs responsible for major subdivisions of the agency's 

activities. USAID has both geographic bureaus (which are responsible for 

the overall activities in the countries where USAID has programs) and 

functional bureaus (that conduct agency programs that are world-wide in 

nature or that cross geographic boundaries.) The agency's geographic 

bureaus include: 

• Sub-Saharan Africa (AFR) 

• Asia and the Near East (ANE) 

• Latin America & the Caribbean (LAC) 

• Europe and Eurasia (E&E) 

USAID's functional bureaus are: 

53 U.S. Agency for International Development, This is USAID (visited Apr. 12, 2000) < 

http://www.info.usaid.gov/about/>. 

54 Mr. Peter D. R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office of 

Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

18 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

• Global Programs, Field Support & Research (G) 

• Humanitarian Response (BHR) 

In addition, certain major headquarters functions are also assigned to 

bureaus. Headquarters bureaus are: 

• Management (M) 

• Legislative and Public Affairs (LPA) 

• Policy and Program Coordination (PPC) 

Each bureau is headed by an Assistant Administrator, appointed by 

the President and confirmed by the Senate. In addition to these bureaus, 

USAID has several independent offices that carry out discrete functions for 

the agency. These offices are headed by directors appointed by the USAID 

Administrator. See Appendix B-3: Organizational Charts for U.S. 

Department of State, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), 

and Office for Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) for a diagram of 

USAID’s structure. It is USAID’s Bureau for Humanitarian Response 

which is key in foreign disaster relief operations, for within it is the Office 

for Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) (described in greater detail below). 

USAID works through “implementing partners”: private voluntary 

organizations, indigenous organizations, universities, American businesses, 

international agencies, other governments, and other U.S. government 

agencies. USAID has working relationships with more that 3,500 American 

companies and over 300 U.S.-based private voluntary organizations.55 

USAID provides funding to the International Committee of the Red 

Cross (ICRC), the International Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC) and 

individual country Red Cross societies. USAID also contracts with NGOs 

and PVOs for specific programs. USAID works closely with UNICEF, the 

World Food Program and other UN agencies.56 

55 U.S. Agency for International Development, This is USAID (visited Jul. 5, 2000) 

<http://www.info.usaid.gov/about/> and <http://www.info.usaid.gov/about/usaidorg.html>. 

56 Mr. Peter D. R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office of 

Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

19 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

4. Office of United States Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) 

When disasters strike in foreign countries, USAID’s Office of U.S. 

Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) is designated to lead the response. See 

Appendix B-3: Organizational Charts for U.S. Department of State, U.S. 

Agency for International Development (USAID), and Office for Foreign 

Disaster Assistance (OFDA). OFDA can respond to disasters through grants 

to the embassy in the affected country, through grants to NGOs and IOs 

working with affected people (such as the United Nations and the 

International Committee of the Red Cross), by fielding a team to the affected 

country to assess the situation and work with relief personnel in the field (a 

Disaster Assistance Response Team, or DART), and by requesting and 

funding military activities in support of their operation. OFDA also 

maintains stockpiles of relief commodities such as plastic sheeting, tents, 

and water purification units, which it can provide quickly when needed. In 

order to reduce the impact of disasters when they strike, OFDA also 

sponsors development of early warning system technology and in-country 

and international training programs designed to strengthen the ability of 

foreign governments to rely on their own resources.57 

USAID/OFDA is the lead agency for U.S. government foreign 

disaster relief. The OFDA Director is primarily responsible for coordinating 

the U.S. government’s response to foreign disasters. All requests for U.S. 

government assistance, including requests to the military, should be routed 

through OFDA.58 

USAID/OFDA’s response options include:59 

•	 Deploying Regional Advisors. Regional Advisors are regional 

disaster management specialists with language skills, and are 

located in Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa and the AsiaPacific region. 

57 The Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, About OFDA (visited Apr. 13, 2000) 

<http://www.info.usaid.gov/ofda/>. 

58 The Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, About OFDA (visited Jul. 5, 2000) 

<http://www.info.usaid.gov/ofda/>. 

59 Mr. Peter D. R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office of 

Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

20 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

•	 Deploying Assessment Teams. They assess the situation, define 

needs and priorities, and recommend specific U.S. Government 

response actions. 

•	 Deploying a Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART). This is 

a rapid-response management team made up of disaster relief 

specialists. Its functions include assisting the U.S. Ambassador or 

Chief of Mission, identifying and prioritizing needs, reporting on 

the situation, recommending response actions, and coordinating 

with the affected country and other response organizations. 

•	 Providing OFDA disaster relief commodities. These commodities 

include items such as blankets, tents, plastic sheeting, 5 and 3000­

gallon water containers, and are located in four stockpile locations: 

Maryland, Honduras, Italy and Guam. 

•	 Funding NGO/PVO/IO/UN directly or providing funds through the 

U.S. Embassy. 

•	 Combinations of the above. 

USAID/OFDA’s mandate is to save lives, alleviate suffering, reduce the 

economic impact of disasters, and to support and design initiatives to reduce 

the likelihood and severity of disasters.60 

USAID/OFDA became involved in Hurricane Mitch relief efforts 

early on. See Appendix K-2: Hurricane Mitch U.S. Government 

Organizations Timeline for a timeline of key USAID/OFDA response 

events. Nicaragua is an example. By Thursday 29 October 1998 (just after 

Mitch moved across Honduras), the USAID Mission to Nicaragua had 

started purchasing relief supplies for the Nicaraguan government: rain boots, 

blankets, raincoats, water containers, water purification chemicals, fuel, 

lumber, nails, tools. On Friday 30 October, the Public Law 480 Title II 

Program was converted from a Development Program to an Emergency 

Feeding Program for those in shelters whose homes were destroyed. USAID 

Nicaragua authorized three of the U.S. PVOs —Save the Children, ADRA 

and Project Concern— to start using the warehoused food to feed refugees. 

Food consisted primarily of corn-soy blend and vegetable oil. USAID’s 

60 Mr. Peter D. R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office of 

Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

21 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

focus for the first week of November was assisting with search and rescue, 

distributing relief supplies, and conducting damage assessments and needs 

analyses (human injuries and deaths, crop damage, infrastructure damage, 

food needs). 61 

USAID/OFDA had people on the ground in the affected nations 

before the first military augmentees lifted off from the U.S. By 2 

November, the day before the first U.S. helicopters arrived in Managua, 

Nicaragua, USAID/OFDA had accomplished all the following: 

•	 Deployed at least 14 Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) 

members to Honduras, Nicaragua, Belize, Guatemala, and El 

Salvador. 

•	 Provided $2,312,974 in relief aid to these countries:62 

•	 $1,726,650 to Honduras, to include $750,000 for deployment 

of DoD (U.S. Army) helicopters, $400,000 to local PVOs, 

and $200,000 to the USAID mission in Honduras; 

•	 $45,000 to Costa Rica through the U.S. Embassy; 

•	 $25,000 to Belize for the local purchase of food for 

distribution in shelters; 

•	 $360,000 to Nicaragua, to include $250,000 for deployment 

of two U.S. Army Blackhawk and one Chinook helicopters; 

and, 

•	 $82,152 to El Salvador in cash and relief supplies, $64,172 

to Guatemala and more. 

By 24 December 1998, USAID funding assistance in response to 

Hurricane Mitch totaled $28,850,730.63 This included: 

•	 Direct provision of relief supplies—food, blankets, rolls of plastic 

sheeting, raincoats, boots, water bladders, storage tanks and jugs, 

61 Ms. Lynn Vega, USAID Nicaragua Mission, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). 

62 Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, OFDA Reports Archive, Central America – Hurricane Mitch Fact 

Sheets #1- #22 (visited Apr. 13, 2000) <http://www.info.usaid.gov/hum_response/ofda/archives.html >. 

63 Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, OFDA Reports Archive, Central America – Hurricane Mitch Fact 

Sheet #22 (Dec. 24, 1998) (visited Apr. 13, 2000) 

<http://www.info.usaid.gov/hum_response/ofda/archives.html >. 

22 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

water purification chemicals, fuel, lumber, nails, tools, body bags, 

etc. 

•	 Ambassador Assistance Authority for purchase and transport of 

relief supplies (done for immediate, critical response). 

•	 Contracting of airlifts of relief commodities and rentals of local 

helicopters for aerial assessments. 

•	 Funding of DoD overflight assessments, transport of relief items, 

and search and rescue activities ($5,000,000). 

•	 Grants to PVOs for immediate purchase and distribution of relief 

supplies. 

•	 Grants to the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) for 

health, water and sanitation activities. 

•	 Grants to the Honduran national water agency, SANAA (Servicio 

Autonomo Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados) and la 

Coordinadora Nacional de Organizaciones Negras de Honduras 

urgirá al Fondo hondureño de Inversión Social (FHIS) for water 

system repairs. 

•	 Funding to the Center for International Tropical Agriculture 

(CIAT) for seed multiplication in Nicaragua and Honduras. 

•	 Funding to DoD for reconstruction activities, including the 

purchase of materials and supplies ($5,000,000). 

•	 Grants to CARE for disaster relief projects. 

•	 Grants to PVOs for transitional disaster relief projects. 

5. Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining (HA/D), Defense 

Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) 

The Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining (HA/D) is 

assigned to the Defense Security and Cooperation Agency (DSCA). (See 

Appendix B-2: Department of Defense Organizational Charts.) HA/D is the 

principal coordinating office within the U.S. military for foreign disaster 

relief matters. (It supplanted the Office for Peacekeeping and Humanitarian 

Assistance.)64 

64 In April 1996, The Secretary of Defense announced the consolidation of the offices of peacekeeping and 

humanitarian and refugee affairs under the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Peacekeeping and 

Humanitarian Assistance. The consolidation was intended to better support the President's policies and 

direction in the DoD’s dealing with foreign disaster relief and humanitarian relief activities, including 

emergencies, dealing with non-governmental organizations, excess defense property program, and the 

23 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

DSCA functions include: management of the Overseas Humanitarian, 

Disaster, and Civic Aid appropriation; oversight of the geographical 

commanders in chief (CINC) operational demining, humanitarian and civic 

assistance (HCA) programs, and the DoD Humanitarian Assistance Program 

(HAP). 

a. Humanitarian and Civic Assistance (HCA) Program 

U.S. military forces are permitted to carry out humanitarian assistance 

projects and activities as part of training operations overseas. These 

deployments are an integral aspect of maintaining a forward U.S. military 

presence, ensuring operational readiness to respond to crises, and preparing 

the Reserve Components for their wartime missions. Humanitarian and 

Civic Assistance (HCA) activities are conducted in conjunction with 

authorized military operations and are authorized by 10 USC section 401. 

Such activities must promote the security interests of both the U.S. and the 

recipient countries, and enhance the specific operational skills of the 

members of the armed forces who participate. 

The State Department must approve all HCA initiatives. Humanitarian 

and civic assistance may not be provided (directly or indirectly) to any 

individual, group, or organization engaged in military or paramilitary 

activity. Typical HCA projects include medical, dental, and veterinary care 

provided in rural areas, construction of rudimentary surface transport 

systems, well drilling and construction of basic sanitation facilities, 

rudimentary construction and repair of public facilities, and other medical 

and engineering projects. Congress appropriates specific funding to the 

military departments to support the HCA program. This is the foundation of 

the New Horizons Exercises, discussed above, and in Lessons Learned 

Department's program for space available transportation of humanitarian relief supplies. This office was 

initially under the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Requirements, then later 

reflagged the Office for Humanitarian Assistance and Demining (HA/D) and placed under the Office of the 

Undersecretary of Defense (Policy). On March 13, 1998, the HA/D was reassigned to the Defense Security 

Cooperation Agency (DSCA). See Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, News Release No. 337-96, 

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Assistance 

Established (June 6, 1996); Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining (visited Apr. 13, 2000) 

<http://www.dsca.osd.mil/HA/hca_demine.htm>. 

24 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

section L. Reserve Component Contributions and Lessons Learned. The 

Army allocates funds to EUCOM and SOUTHCOM, the Navy funds 

PACOM, and the Air Force funds CENTCOM.65 

The Director, Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) is the 

DoD approval authority for all interagency HCA projects. DSCA/HA/D 

coordinates the process of interagency review and approval for annual HCA 

plans and 'out of cycle' requests submitted by the CINCs. The office is also 

responsible for monitoring the overall program to ensure that nominations 

comply fully with U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives, and 

relevant legislation, before formal approval is provided to the Combatant 

Commands. HA/D prepares the annual report to Congress required by 10 

USC section 401. 

b. Humanitarian Assistance Program (HAP) 

HAP provides excess, non-lethal, property to authorized recipients, 

arranges DoD funded and Denton (Space Available) transportation for nongovernmental organizations for delivery of humanitarian goods to countries 

in need, coordinates foreign disaster relief missions, and procures, manages, 

and arranges for delivery of Humanitarian Daily Rations (HDRs) to those in 

need. DoD humanitarian assistance (HA) activities were first authorized by 

Congress in 1986 to transport DoD excess non-lethal property and privately 

donated humanitarian assistance material to countries in need. In fiscal year 

(FY) 1996, DoD was permitted to fund a wider variety of HA activities, 

including using contracts and deployment of U.S. military personnel to 

conduct specific humanitarian projects. The program is authorized by 10 

U.S.C. section 2551 and its projects are funded by the Overseas 

Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Action (OHDACA) account. (See section 

D. Fiscal Law for a more detailed discussion of funding issues.) Projects 

include the refurbishment of medical facilities, construction of school 

buildings, digging of wells and improvement of sanitary facilities, and 

training of host country personnel in refugee repatriation operations and 

disaster relief planning. The involvement of the geographical commanders in 

chief (CINCs) has been key to the design and execution of the projects and 

the success of the program.66 

65 Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining, Humanitarian and Civic Assistance (HCA) Program 

(visited April 14, 2000) <http://www.dsca.osd.mil/home/humanitarian_civic_assistance_program.htm>. 

66 Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining, Humanitarian Assistance Program (HAP) (visited 

April 14, 2000) <http://www.dsca.osd.mil/home/humanitarian_assistance_program.htm>. 

25 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

DoD manages all programs funded by the OHDACA appropriation. 

DSCA responsibilities include advising the USDP in all program 

management and execution matters relating to overseas humanitarian 

assistance activities and foreign disaster relief issues. 

All requests for U.S. military foreign disaster relief assistance should 

flow through HA/D. Upon receiving a request for assistance, this office 

coordinates the U.S. military response within the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense, with the unified combatant CINCs, the CJCS, and the military 

departments. HA/D is organized along CINC lines. See Appendix B-4: 

Organizational Charts for Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) 

and Its Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining (HA/D). 

6. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) participated in the 

Hurricane Mitch relief effort through three food assistance programs. In 

some foreign disaster assistance mission, the Forest Service may play a role. 

a. USDA Food Assistance67 

USDA currently provides food aid abroad through three channels:68 

the Public Law 480 (PL 480) program, also known as the Food for Peace 

program; the Section 416(b) program; and the Food for Progress program.69 

The major authorities for grant and concessional credit food aid are the 

Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954 as amended 

(Public Law 480), the Food for Progress Act of 1985, and Section 416(b) of 

the Agricultural Act of 1949. Amendments to these authorities are 

contained in Title XV of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act 

of 1990 (FACT Act). 

67 See U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Aid Programs (visited April 21, 2000) 

<http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/pl480/pl480ofst.html>. 

68 Commodities will not be made available unless there are adequate storage facilities in the recipient 

country and the distribution will not interfere with domestic production or marketing. 

69 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Aid Programs (visited April 21, 2000) 

<http://www.fas.usda.gov/food-aid.html>. 

26 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

(1) The Food for Peace Program 

The PL 480 food aid program is comprised of three titles.70 Each title 

has different objectives and provides agricultural assistance to countries at 

different levels of economic development. Title I of the PL 480 program is 

administered by USDA and Titles II and III are administered by USAID. PL 

480 programs are designed to combat hunger and malnutrition; promote 

broad-based equitable and sustainable development, including agricultural 

development; expand international trade; develop and expand export 

markets for United States agricultural commodities; and to foster and 

70 Title I provides for government-to-government sales of agricultural commodities to developing 

countries under long-term credit arrangements. A developing country shall be considered eligible for PL 

480 Title I if it has a shortage of foreign exchange earnings and has difficulty meeting all of its food needs 

through commercial channels. Repayments for agricultural commodities sold under this title may be made 

either in U.S. dollars or in local currencies on credit terms up to 30 years, with a grace period of up to seven 

years. Local currencies received under Title I sales agreements may be used in carrying out activities under 

section 104 of the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as amended. Activities in 

the recipient country for which these local currencies may be used include developing new markets for U.S. 

agricultural commodities on a mutually beneficial basis, paying U.S. obligations, and supporting 

agricultural development or research.70 

Title II provides for the donation of U.S. agricultural commodities by the U.S. government to meet 

humanitarian food needs in foreign countries. Commodities may be provided to meet emergency needs 

under government-to-government agreements, through public and private agencies, including 

intergovernmental organizations such as the World Food Program, and other multilateral organizations.70 

Non-emergency assistance may be provided through private voluntary organizations, cooperatives, and 

intergovernmental organizations. Commodities requested may be furnished from the Commodity Credit 

Corporation's (CCC's) inventory acquired under price support programs or purchased from private stocks. 

Note that with this program, the CCC finances the cost of ocean transportation to ports of entry, or to points 

of entry other than ports in the case of landlocked countries or when the use of a point of entry other than 

port would result in substantial savings in costs or time. The CCC may also pay transportation costs from 

designated ports of entry or points of entry abroad to storage and distribution sites, and associated storage 

and distribution costs for commodities, including pre-positioned commodities, made available to meet 

urgent or extraordinary relief requirements. 

Title III provides for government-to-government grants to support long-term economic development in the 

least developed countries. To be eligible for donation of agricultural commodities under Title III, the 

country must meet poverty criteria established by the International Bank for Reconstruction and 

Development for Civil Works Preference for providing financial assistance, or be determined to be a food 

deficit country by meeting all the indicators of national food deficit and malnutrition.70 The U.S. 

Government will donate Title III agricultural commodities without charge to the recipient country and will 

arrange for and pay the costs of purchasing, processing, handling and transporting the commodities to the 

port or point of entry in the recipient country. The donated commodities are sold on the domestic market, 

and revenue generated from the sale in the recipient countries is used to support programs of economic 

development. 

27 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

encourage the development of private enterprise and democratic 

participation in developing countries.71 

(2) The Food for Progress (FFP) Program72 

This program authorizes the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to 

finance the sale and exportation of agricultural commodities on credit terms, 

or on a grant basis, to support developing countries and countries that are 

emerging democracies and have made commitments to introduce or expand 

free enterprise elements into their agricultural economies.73 Commodities 

may be provided under the authority of PL 480, Title I, or Section 416(b). 

CCC funds can be used for both the procurement and shipment of 

commodities when CCC does not have surplus commodities in inventory. 

For commodities furnished on a grant basis, the CCC may pay, in addition to 

acquisition costs and ocean transportation, such related commodity and 

delivery charges.74 

(3) Section 416(b) 

This program provides for overseas donations of surplus commodities 

owned by the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to carry out assistance 

programs in developing countries and friendly countries. Surplus 

commodities acquired by the CCC as a result of price support operations 

may be made available under section 416(b) if these surplus commodities 

cannot be sold or otherwise disposed of without disruption of price support 

programs or at competitive world prices. These donations are not permitted 

to reduce the amounts of commodities that traditionally are donated to 

domestic feeding programs or agencies, prevent the fulfillment of any 

71 No agricultural commodity shall be available if its disposition would reduce the domestic supply below 

domestic requirements and provide adequate carryover, unless the Secretary of Agriculture determines that 

some part of the supply should be used for urgent humanitarian purposes. Alcoholic beverages and tobacco 

products shall not be made available under PL 480. 

72 The Food for Progress program is limited by a global 500,000 metric ton legislative ceiling, and by a $30 

million cap on non-commodity costs (primarily transportation) paid directly by CCC. 

73 Legislation was amended in 1992 to include the independent states of the former Soviet Union as eligible 

countries under this program. 

74 Cargo preference requirements require that at least 75 percent of all U.S. food aid tonnage be shipped on 

U.S.- flag vessels. This requirement applies to shipments under PL 480, Food for Progress and §416(b). 

28 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

agreement entered into under a payment-in-kind program, or disrupt normal 

commercial sales.75 

The USDA food assistance programs contributed significantly to the 

Hurricane Mitch relief effort. The Food for Peace Program $10 million in 

long-term concessional loans under PL 480 Title I to both El Salvador and 

Guatemala.76 The Food for Progress (FFP) program distributed$10 million 

in commodities to Honduras and Nicaragua.77 Section 416(b) programs 

provided 180,000 tons of corn and wheat at an approximate value of $27 

million as follows: 60,000 tons of wheat each to Honduras and Nicaragua, 

30, 000 tons of wheat each to El Salvador and Guatemala, and 50,000 tons 

of corn among the four nations. The initial donations were given to the 

Catholic Relief Services (a PVO discussed below) in Honduras and to the 

government in Nicaragua for direct distribution to people facing food 

shortages. Follow-on donations were to be sold and the proceeds used to 

undertake social development projects and rehabilitation of infrastructure, 

particularly secondary and tertiary roads in rural areas.78 

USDA and the Forest Service (discussed below) were also involved in 

damage assessment, assisting rebuilding of rural areas and the infrastructure, 

implementing conservation practices, and improving food safety measures. 

75 Eligible commodities include: dairy products, rice, feed grains and products, and oilseeds and other 

commodities acquired by the CCC through price support operations. Commodities may not be made 

available in amounts that will reduce amounts traditionally used for domestic feeding programs or will 

prevent fulfillment of a payment-in-kind program. 

76 Tom Amontree, USDA Announces Details of Food Aid Package for Central America, USDA Release 

No. 0491.98 (Nov. 24, 1998). 

77 Tom Amontree, USDA Announces Details of Food Aid Package for Central America, USDA Release 

No. 0491.98 (Nov. 24, 1998). 

78 Tom Amontree, USDA Announces Wheat Donations to Honduras and Nicaragua, USDA Release No. 

0466.98 (Nov. 10, 1998); Tom Amontree, USDA Announces Details of Food Aid Package for Central 

America, USDA Release No. 0491.98 (Nov. 24, 1998); Wayne Baggett, Glickman Announces Wheat and 

Corn Donations to Nicaragua, USDA Release No. 0061.99 (Feb. 19, 1999). 

29 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(b) USDA Forest Service (FS) and Disaster Assistance Support 

Program (DASP)79 

The Forest Service is a department of the USDA. The Forest 

Service’s Disaster Assistance Support Program (DASP) is designed to 

provide emergency management technical support to USAID/OFDA. DASP 

is part of the Forest Service’s Office of International Programs (OIP). DASP 

was formally established in 1985 as a collaborative relationship with OFDA. 

DASP provides disaster management and organizational methodology 

training for USAID, as well as the State Department; U.S. Public Health 

Service; Department of Defense; and local counties and municipalities 

B. NON-GOVERNMENTAL, PRIVATE VOLUNTARY, AND INTERNATIONAL 

ORGANIZATIONS 

A wide variety of organizations contributed to the relief effort 

following Hurricane Mitch. The impressive accomplishments of these 

organizations cannot be captured in this report. Three representative 

contributors are profiled here as examples. Judge advocates deployed in 

support of foreign disaster assistance operations should become familiar 

with the organizations operating in their area. For lessons learned in this 

regard, see Section IV.B., Coordination Between Governmental, NonGovernmental, and Other Organizations. A more detailed list of IOs, NGOs 

and PVOs is included at Appendix B-6: International Organizations (IOs), 

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and Private Organizations 

(PVOs). 

1. CARE 

CARE, or Coop American Relief Everywhere, started after World 

War II to offer relief to Europe. CARE works in seventy countries and has 

an annual budget of almost a half billion dollars. They concentrate on two 

types of programs, development and emergency. When a country becomes 

developed enough, CARE pulls out. CARE has country agreements with 

79 Information on the U.S. Forest Service and its International Programs was obtained directly from the 

United States Department of Agriculture, International Programs (visited April 18, 2000) 

<http://svinet2.fs.fed.us/global/about/dasp/aboutdasp.htm>. 

30 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

every country in which they operate. For example, CARE has an agreement 

with the President of the Republic of Nicaragua through the Ministry of 

Foreign Affairs. These agreements address issues such as exemptions from 

taxes, fees, status of their personnel, etc., much like status of forces 

agreements. 

CARE responded to Hurricane Mitch in El Salvador, Guatemala, 

Honduras and Nicaragua. CARE:80 

•	 Distributed food (including rice, oil and beans), drinking water, 

medicine, mattresses, blankets, cooking articles (kerosene stoves, 

pots), and other emergency supplies; 

•	 Aided in agricultural rehabilitation, including seeds and tools 

distribution (to meet the December-deadline for the short growing 

season, or apante), cleaning and repairing water sources, and 

repairing and rebuilding homes and structures; and, 

•	 Repaired community infrastructures, to include cleaning and 

disinfecting wells, repairing gravity-fed wells, rebuilding latrines, 

distributing hygiene supplies (chlorine tablets, cleaning/washing 

supplies, plastic buckets), distributing tools and building supplies 

(plastic sheeting, wood, nails, corrugated roofing materials), and 

food-for-work programs to organize locals into effective labor 

forces. 

2. Catholic Relief Services (CRS) 

Catholic Relief Services (CRS) was founded in 1943 by the Catholic 

Bishops of the United States to assist the poor and disadvantaged outside the 

U.S.81 CRS had been working in the countries affected by Hurricane Mitch 

for 35 years. Before and after Hurricane Mitch, the agency supported microenterprise development and sustainable agricultural techniques. 

CRS’s strategy in Central America in response to Hurricane Mitch 

included saving lives through distribution of food and medicine and 

sustaining livelihoods through the rehabilitation of agriculture and small 

businesses and the reconstruction of houses, bridges, roads, and water 

80 See CARE Nicaragua: An Overview (March 1999) (copy on file with CLAMO). 

81 Catholic Relief Services, Mission Statement (visited Apr. 24, 2000) 

<http://www.catholicrelief.org/who/mission.cfm>. 

31 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

systems. CRS led the emergency food distribution efforts for USDA’s 

416(b) program in Honduras. CRS reported over $10 million in donations 

by the U.S. public received as of December 1998 to support rehabilitation 

efforts in Central America.82 1999 figures reported private donations 

totaling more than $28 million. 

3. Doctors Without Borders (Medecins Sans Frontieres) 

Doctors Without Borders (Medecins Sans Frontieres) (MSF), founded 

in 1971 by a group of French Doctors,83 was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize 

in December 1999.84 MSF provides emergency medical aid to countries 

with insufficient or non-existent health care capabilities, builds and 

rehabilitates medical facilities, donates medicines, and is active in water and 

sanitation projects.85 

MSF assisted the relief effort in Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador, 

and Guatemala. Programs focused on epidemiological surveys, sanitation 

and clean water, control of disease vectors, emergency shelter, and delivery 

of medicines and medical supplies.86 MSF then initiated longer-term 

programs in these countries to address continuing needs.87 

The organizations discussed are but a sampling of the agencies 

actively engaged in relief efforts following Hurricane Mitch. The discussion 

is intended only to familiarize judge advocates with the scope and variety of 

the programs involved. Other organizations active in this effort included 

UNICEF, the American Red Cross, the World Bank, and the World Health 

Organization. The need for enhanced interagency cooperation is discussed 

in the lesson learned section below. 

82 Louise Wilmot, Beyond Mitch (Nov. 1998) (visited Apr. 24, 2000) 

<http://www.catholicrelief.org/emergency/beyond_mitch.cfm> 

83 “28 Years On: Milestones of a Humanitarian Movement,” (visited July 20, 2000) 

<http://www.msf.org/msf/history.htm> 

84 “MSF and the 1999 Nobel Peace Prize,” (visited July 20, 2000) 

<http://www.msf.org/events/1999/nobel/index.htm> 

85 “The MSF Role in Emergency Medical Aid,” (visited July 30, 2000) 

<http://www.msf.org/msf/aboutus.htm> 

86 “Doctors Without Borders Response to the Mitch Disaster,” (visited July 30, 2000) 

<http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/reports/mitch.htm> 

87 Id. 

32 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 

1998-1999 

IV. LESSONS LEARNED 

A lesson is not a lesson learned until we modify the way we 

operate.88 

Major General John D. Altenberg, Jr. 

The Assistant Judge Advocate General 

A. INTRODUCTION TO LEGAL ISSUES 

1. Legal issues confronted in a foreign disaster relief operation are widely 

varied but largely predictable. 

In a foreign disaster relief operation, the legal issues faced by judge 

advocates span all core legal disciplines89 and require legal support to 

operations in all three functional areas: command and control, sustainment, 

and personnel service support.90 Examples of the types of issues faced 

include: 

•	 Administrative Law: investigations (to include a Class A helicopter 

accident); ethics (foreign gifts to commanders); customs and U.S. 

Department of Agriculture issues; turnover of military property to 

host nations (medicine, food, pesticides). 

•	 Civil Law: 

•	 Contract Issues: Contract review; real estate leases. 

•	 Fiscal Issues: transportation of NGO personnel and relief 

supplies; military construction; unauthorized commitments; 

plaques and coins; feeding host nation personnel; combined 

military training. 

•	 Environmental Issues: Disposal of chemicals and hazardous 

waste; handling of medical waste; vector control operations. 

88 MG John D. Altenburg, Jr., The Assistant Judge Advocate General, Address at the Center for Law and 

Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (transcript on file with 

CLAMO). 

89 The six core legal disciplines are: administrative law, civil law (including contract, fiscal, and 

environmental law), claims, international law, legal assistance, and military justice. DEP’T OF THE ARMY 

FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS, p. 8 (1 Mar. 2000). 

90 Legal support to operations falls into these three functional areas. Issues within the six core legal 

disciplines may require legal support impacting any of the three functional areas depending on their nature. 

See DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS, p. 8 (1 Mar. 2000). 

33 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

•	 Claims: Foreign Claims Commission orders; “solatia”-like 

payments; investigations; funding; personnel claims. 

•	 Legal Assistance: legal assistance to widely dispersed troops; 

conflicts of interest; notarizing; Soldiers and Sailors Civil relief 

Act (SSCRA). 

•	 Military Justice: Jurisdictional issues; general orders; Article 15 

appeal authorities; withholding policies; TDS support. 

•	 International Law: Status of Forces Agreements; negotiation of 

international agreements, such as Diplomatic Notes. 

Past experience has shown that many of these issues are encountered 

in a variety of deployed settings. Thus, many of these issues are predictable 

and should be anticipated and properly planned for in a legal support plan. 

See section K.2. Prepare a legal support plan for the operation. 

2. The type and quantity of legal issues will vary by phase (with time). 

Operations change over time. The type and quantity of legal issues 

faced by JAs, as well as the quality of information available91 will vary by 

phase. Accurately predicting the flow of legal issues allows the JA to better 

tailor legal support to the specific operation. Understanding the patterns of 

legal issues that developed during Hurricane Mitch relief efforts may help 

JAs to prepare for the next foreign disaster relief operation. 

The general issues, by phase, during the hurricane Mitch relief effort 

92 were:

•	 Predeployment or Plan and Prepare Phase: Significant activity 

occurred in the command and control and personnel service 

support functional areas. The primary focus was predeployment 

training and preparation of the troops: rules of engagement, human 

91 See, e.g., Captain Adrian Henderson, JTF-BRAVO Command Judge Advocate as of Nov. 1998, Address 

at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) 

(Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). See also CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY 

OPERATIONS, LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN THE BALKANS, 1995-1998: LESSONS LEARNED FOR 

JUDGE ADVOCATES, pp. 53-55 (13 Nov. 1998), for a discussion of this issue as it arose in Bosnia. 

92 See, e.g., Captain Adrian Henderson, JTF-BRAVO Command Judge Advocate as of Nov. 1998, Address 

at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) 

(Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO); Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila 

Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After 

Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

34 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 

1998-1999 

rights, force protection and terrorism training, and Soldier 

Readiness Processing (SRPs) of wills, powers of attorney, and 

other legal needs. 

•	 Emergency or Search and rescue and Immediate Relief Phase: 

Command and control issues dominated initially: authority to act; 

participating in the military decision making process, force 

protection and rules of engagement, and international law issues 

(status of forces agreements and exchange of diplomatic notes). 

•	 Rehabilitation or Sustained Relief Phase: The focus of efforts was 

on food distribution, road and bridge repair, medical assistance, 

etc. Sustainment issues (fiscal and contract law, foreign claims) 

dominated, followed by command and control issues (force 

protection, general orders and command discipline), then personnel 

service support issues (legal assistance and routine military 

justice). 

•	 Restoration Phase: The focus of efforts was on preventive 

medicine, food and supply distribution, ongoing repairs and 

construction, etc. Personnel service support issues (legal 

assistance and routine military justice matters) grew to dominate, 

followed by sustainment issues (still focused on fiscal and contract 

law issues, claims, and some environmental issues), then command 

and control issues (force protection). 

Another important lesson learned about rapidly changing phases in an 

operation is that legal opinions can grow “stale” (become invalid or 

erroneous) with time. JAs must ensure legal opinions address each issue 

under the current facts and situation, and that commanders do not rely upon 

old or uniquely grounded opinions as a continued basis of authority. 

3. Conduct “Legal Preparation of the Battlefield” (LPB) prior to 

deployment. 

Predicting legal issues in an operation is important because doing so 

contributes directly to the JA’s planning and decision-making process. 

Decisions must be made as to what personnel, resources, materiel and 

equipment are required to provide legal support throughout the phases of the 

operation and throughout the area of operations. A legal support plan must 

be devised which accommodates and supports each phase of the operation 

appropriately. 

35 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

One method of predicting the legal issues is to read after action 

reports and lessons learned materials such as this book. Another, proactive 

method of predicting legal issues is to conduct Legal Preparation of the 

Battlefield, or LPB.

93 LPB is a methodology, or a planning tool, derived 

from the Intelligence community’s Intelligence Preparation of the 

Battlefield, (IPB) to help the JA anticipate legal issues in operations. Simply 

put, the JA prepares a chart analyzing requirements from each core legal 

discipline for each phase of the operation. See Appendix A: Legal 

Preparation of the Battlefield for a full explanation of LPB and its terms. 

Next the JA identifies those issues that are mission critical, and 

attempts to resolve them proactively. The JA practices preventive law 

where possible and identifies critical legal issues for the commander and 

staff. The resulting LPB product is then used to create a legal support plan. 

This plan determines the personnel, resources, materiel and equipment 

needed, as well as where they are needed, and when and how they will get 

there. The plan should account for vehicle and equipment loading deadlines 

and including legal personnel in the TPFDL (Time Phased Force 

Deployment List) so they arrive in theater at appropriate times. 

93 Legal Preparation of the Battlefield (LPB) is a concept developed by Major Geoffrey Corn of the 

International and Operational Law Department at the Judge Advocate General’s School, Charlottesville, 

Virginia. 

36 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

B. COORDINATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENTAL, NON-GOVERNMENTAL, 

AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS 

The most important lesson learned from the Hurricane Mitch relief 

operation was the need for better interagency and inter-organizational 

coordination. More effective coordination should have occurred among all 

the involved parties: U.S. agencies and organizations, host nation 

governments, and international, non-governmental, and private 

organizations. JAs in the operation had little contact with non-DoD U.S. 

government agencies, such as USAID/OFDA, or NGOs/PVOs. Neither JAs 

nor commanders had a clear understanding of the manner in which GOs and 

NGOs/PVOs operated or how to work with them cooperatively.94 This 

adversely affected unity of effort and economy of force throughout the 

mission. 95 

1. Judge advocates must identify agencies and NGOs/PVOs in the area of 

operations. 

The first step in a future foreign disaster relief operation is to learn 

who the key players are and what they do. The JAs deployed in support of 

Hurricane Mitch relief operations reported that they did not know which 

organizations were working in their area or what those organizations were 

planning. Interaction between the U.S. military and external organizations 

was limited. The JA deployed in support of disaster relief operations must 

identify the organizations working nearby and determine their goals and 

capabilities. 

As discussed above, USAID/OFDA, in concert with DoS and the Mil 

Groups, will have the U.S. lead in disaster relief operations. Other DoD 

organizations, such as Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), will 

play a significant role. Other GOs, such as USDA, will also be involved. 

USAID/OFDA will work closely with PVOs/NGOs, which are often the first 

94 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

95 See, e.g., Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the 

Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power 

Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO); Mr. Yan Schollaert, Country Director, CARE Nicaragua, 

Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 

1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

37 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

to respond and the last to leave. Many of these organizations have ongoing 

operations in nations throughout the world. They are often very familiar 

with the host nation government and other NGOs/PVOs in the area. 

The USAID/OFDA representative and the Mil Group liaison are 

excellent sources of information concerning other organizations in the area. 

Identification of the GOs and NGOs/PVOs working in the area is the first 

step toward better interagency cooperation. 

Deployed units should also assess the focus and abilities of the 

NGOs/PVOs working in the area. Most NGOs/PVOs are well organized and 

offer extensive programs. However, NGOs/PVOs vary in structure. They 

can be national or international. They will usually have a specific focus, 

such as development, medicine, or education. Their funding sources vary; 

their philosophy often reflects their focus and funding. 

Commands should conduct an assessment of the NGOs/PVOs likely 

to be encountered in the area of operations in order to decide whether and 

how to coordinate with them. Assessment criteria could include the 

organization’s vision, history, logistics capability and programs.96 

2. Military units must foster closer working relationships with these 

agencies. 

Once the agencies working in the area have been identified, lines of 

communication must be opened and liaison established. Figure B-1 

96 Mr. Yan Schollaert, Country Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and Military 

Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on 

file with CLAMO). The following criteria may prove useful in assessing NGOs/PVOs: Vision. What is the 

basis of the NGO/PVO vision or mission—religion, politics, philosophy? Specific backgrounds are not 

always bad. For example, Nicaragua is predominantly Catholic. As a result, CRS was extremely effective. 

Does the NGO/PVO solicit money and contribution in kind, or invite personal involvement and support? 

History and references. How long has the NGO/PVO existed? How do others (other organizations, 

USAID, the host nation government, local authorities) view it? What prior experience does it have with the 

military? Logistics capacity and systems. What are its internal and external capacities? What finance 

systems does it operate under? Can it account for where money is spent? Surge ability? Programs. What 

is their area of specialty or expertise? What past successful programs have they done? What relationships 

have they built with other organizations in the area, the host nation government, and communities in the 

field? Commitment. What has the NGO/PVO done in past emergencies? What is its future plans? What is 

the time frame of its focus? 

38 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

illustrates the types of organizations participating in a foreign disaster relief 

operation and the coordination U.S. forces should make with them. 

Figure B-1: JTF Coordination.97 

At the tactical level, the joint task force commander’s (CJTF) options 

for improved coordination include forming a Humanitarian Operations 

Center (HOC) and a Civil Military Operations Center (CMOC). A primary 

reference on military coordination with the participants in humanitarian 

relief operations is Department of the Army Field Manual 100-23-1, HA 

Multiservice Procedures for Humanitarian Assistance Operations (31 Oct. 

1994), hereinafter FM 100-23-1. 

a. Humanitarian Operations Centers (HOCs) 

The CJTF can create a HOC to coordinate interagency operations. A 

HOC is usually collocated with the appropriate headquarters, such as the 

UN, conducting the operation. Because there was no international-level 

headquarters for the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, the U.S. HOCs were 

located near the subordinate Task Force Headquarters. 

97 DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 100-23-1, HA MULTISERVICE PROCEDURES FOR HUMANITARIAN 

ASSISTANCE OPERATIONS, Figure 4-3 (31 Oct. 1994). 

39 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

In accordance with FM 100-23-1, HOC functions include: 

•	 Developing an overall relief strategy. 

•	 Identifying and prioritizing HA needs to the JTF. 

•	 Identifying logistics requirements for NGOs, PVOs, and 

IOs. 

The HOC does not command and control in the military sense, but attempts 

to build a consensus for mutual assistance and unity of effort. The HOC 

should consist of decision-makers from the JTF, UN agencies, the 

Department of State, USAID/OFDA, regional NGO and PVO 

representatives, other IOs, such as the ICRC, and host nation authorities. 

A HOC or similar organizations is critical at the tactical level. During 

the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, coordination among disaster relief 

participants was insufficient at that level. The HOC promotes this type of 

coordination. HOCs did not perform to their potential in the Hurricane 

Mitch relief effort because they were formed as an afterthought. They 

should have been integrated into the concept of the operation from the 

beginning. 

Figure B-2: Humanitarian Operations Center Organizations98 

98 DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 100-23-1, HA MULTISERVICE PROCEDURES FOR HUMANITARIAN 

ASSISTANCE OPERATIONS, Figure 4-4 (31 Oct. 1994). 

40 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

At the end of November 1998, U.S. Army Civil Affairs personnel led 

by LTC Velez and the USAID Representative in Nicaragua, Ms. Lynn Vega, 

started hosting meetings in the USAID office. They invited any 

NGOs/PVOs who wanted to attend. The purpose of these meetings was to 

explain what the military could and could not do and to process NGO and 

PVO requests for assistance. Eventually, this forum became the 

Humanitarian Operations Center (HOC) in San Pedro. The HOC included 

the Task Force Nicaragua commander and members of his staff.99 

Eventually, HOCs were also established in El Salvador and 

Guatemala. In Guatemala, the HOC was made up of Aviation Task Force 

personnel, Civil Affairs personnel, USAID, and the Guatemalan equivalent 

of the U.S. FEMA. 

HOCs are usually chaired by the international organization in charge 

of the relief effort (often the United Nations representative). Because there 

was no international lead during the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, HOCs 

were formed later in the relief effort. This late start limited their 

effectiveness. 

b. The Civil Military Operations Center (CMOC) 

The HOCs were also less successful than desired because they lacked 

an implementing arm. The JTF attempted to combine the coordination and 

consensus building functions of the HOC with the implementing functions 

of the CMOC. This attempt failed, resulting in duplication of effort and the 

issuance of conflicting guidance.100 A CMOC is designed to turn the HOCbuilt consensus into action. Under FM 100-23-1, the CJTF can form a 

CMOC at the tactical level as the action team to carry out the guidance and 

decisions of the HOC. The CMOC serves as the military's presence at the 

99 LTC Al Velez, Chief, Civil Affairs Branch, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, Civil Military 

Operations, U.S. Army South, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch 

After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO); Ms. 

Lynn Vega, USAID Nicaragua Mission, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

100 Doctor (Colonel) Martinez-Lopez reported that, from the medical community perspective, there were 

coordination problems, conflicts, and duplication of effort because of the HOC’s existence. He said, 

however, that if a HOC is created, it is essential to have legal support in the HOC. COL and DR Lester 

Martinez-Lopez, Address at Joint Urban operations Conference, Bolling Air Force Base, Washington, DC 

(Apr. 14, 1999). 

41 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Figure B-3: CMOC Organization101 

HOC, as well as the military liaison to the community of relief 

organizations. Normally, the CMOC director is also the HOC's military 

deputy director. Figure B-3, above, shows the organization of a CMOC. 

The CMOC, in coordination with USAID/OFDA, receives, validates, 

and coordinates requests from NGOs, PVOs, and IOs. The CMOC supports 

NGOs, PVOs, and IOs by responding to validated logistical and security 

support requirements. During CMOC meetings (usually daily), the CMOC 

identifies JTF components that are capable of fulfilling the requests to 

support the NGOs, PVOs, and IOs.102 Validated requests go to the JTF 

operations cell and then to the component or coalition force liaison officer 

(LNO) for action. The HOCs established during the Hurricane Mitch relief 

effort were unable to perform many of the CMOC functions.103 Use of 

CMOCs would have improved interagency cooperation during the operation. 

101 DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 100-23-1, HA MULTISERVICE PROCEDURES FOR HUMANITARIAN 

ASSISTANCE OPERATIONS, Figure 4-5 (31 Oct. 1994). 

102 DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 100-23-1, HA MULTISERVICE PROCEDURES FOR HUMANITARIAN 

ASSISTANCE OPERATIONS, Chapter 4 (31 Oct. 1994). 

103 DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 100-23-1, HA MULTISERVICE PROCEDURES FOR HUMANITARIAN 

ASSISTANCE OPERATIONS, Chapter 4 (31 Oct. 1994). CMOC functions include the following: Validate the 

support request in the absence of the OFDA DART representative; coordinate military requests for military 

support with various military components and NGOs/PVOs; convene and host ad hoc mission planning 

groups involving complicated military support, numerous military units, and numerous NGOs/PVOs; 

promulgate and explain JTF policies to NGOs/PVOs; provide information on JTF operations and general 

security operations; serve as a focal point for weapons policies; administer and issue NGO and PVO 

identification cards; validate NGO, PVO, UN, and ICRC personnel required for JTF aircraft tarmac space, 

space availability (seats on military aircraft), and access-related issues; coordinate medical requirements; 

chair port, rail, and airfield committee meetings for space and access-related issues; maintain 24-hour 

42 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

c. Don’t forget to include International Organizations. 

The response to Hurricane Mitch quickly grew into a multinational 

effort by governments, governmental organizations, non-governmental 

organizations, and private organizations. While USAID/OFDA has the lead 

for U.S. participation, a UN organization, such as the UN Office for the 

Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), may have the lead 

internationally. FM 100-23-1 proposes bringing the UN into the HOC: 

The HOC normally has a UN director and deputy directors 

from the JTF and OFDA DART. Within the HOC the policy 

making body is the standing liaison committee, which is 

comprised of UN, JTF, OFDA DART, and NGO and PVO 

representatives. HOC core groups and committees meet to 

discuss and resolve issues related to topics such as medical 

support, agriculture, water, health, and education.104 

While the UN did not establish an international headquarters for this 

operation, such a headquarters must be included in interagency coordination 

mechanisms when one is established. 

d. Use tactical coordination mechanisms: Civil Affairs (CA).

 The Civil Affairs (CA) personnel were critical to the success of 

Hurricane Mitch. “The CA folks saved us”, according to Major Dale N. 

Johnson, CJA, JTF-Aguila105. CA’s role includes developing working 

relationships with the host nation (e.g., with the Ministries of Defense, 

Health, and transportation and Infrastructure), community leaders, local 

police and authorities, local businesses, and host nation military (to promote 

security, base operations and logistical support).106 

operations; maintain contact with regional and sector CMOCs; support CA teams, as required; facilitate 

creation and organization of a food logistics system for food relief efforts. 

104 DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 100-23-1, HA MULTISERVICE PROCEDURES FOR HUMANITARIAN 

ASSISTANCE OPERATIONS, Ch. 4 (31 Oct. 1994). 

105 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

106 LTC Al Velez, Chief, Civil Affairs Branch, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, Civil Military 

Operations, U.S. Army South, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch 

After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

43 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

During disaster relief deployments, JAs should work closely with CA 

teams. For example, in Nicaragua, JA Captain Scott Walters and two CA 

representatives visited every town where there would be significant military 

presence. They spoke to the Mayors or Mayors’ Representatives and the 

police chiefs, and invited them to contact the JA if issues connected to the 

military presence arose. In this way they were able to establish 

communications and avert misunderstandings.107 CA also assisted JAs in 

claims intakes and investigations. CA teams are an excellent source of 

information for, and link to, NGOs/PVOs as well. 

One key to the Civil Affairs’ teams’ success was their participation in 

the HOC. Civil Affairs soldiers from both from U.S. Army South in Panama 

and the 350th Civil Affairs Command (U.S. Army Reserve) deployed in mid 

and late November 1998. These soldiers established the JTF Aguila level 

Humanitarian Operations Center (HOC) under the leadership of Colonel 

Robert Scharling, Civil Affairs advisor for USARSO. The JTF Aguila HOC 

served as the coordinating center for both internal actions involving Task 

Force base and life support operations, as well as initial project assessments. 

The initial CA soldiers were quickly followed by more active duty 

soldiers from the 96th Civil Affairs Battalion, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, 

and in early December, by Colonel Douglas Monroe, also from the 350th 

CA Command, who would serve as the CA Chief for Operation Fuerte 

Apoyo.108 

CA coordinated media coverage and acted as the liaison between the 

foreign government and the U.S. troops. The CA teams are extremely 

knowledgeable about the host nation’s cultural sensitivities. “In our country, 

an action or a phrase might mean one thing, but to the people of Guatemala 

it might mean something altogether different. It is imperative that we don’t 

have even one incident that might cause concern among the people...”109 

107 Captain Scott Walters, Task Force Nicaragua Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for Law and 

Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and 

transcript on file with CLAMO). 

108 Captain Timothy M. Gilhool, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History of Joint 

Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 (Feb. 1999) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

109 SSG Tim Barnes, 361st Press Camp Headquarters, Behind the Scenes (Apr. 26, 1999) 

<http://www.ussouthcom.com/soughcom/newhorizons/articles/behindthescenes.html,>. 

44 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Other keys to CA’s success were outstanding linguistic skills and preexisting relationships from previous deployments to the region. 

One of the best examples of CA interagency coordination was the 

construction of a medical facility in the village of Wiwili in Nicaragua. 

Located north of Managua in the mountains, Wiwili’s main and secondary 

roads and its medical clinic had been destroyed by floodwaters and mud 

slides. All supplies had to be brought in by helicopter. Over the course of 

two months, CA personnel assisted the Engineers and Medical personnel 

from TF Nicaragua in building two 40’ by 100’ structures, complete with 

plumbing and electricity. USAID donated medical equipment and supplies. 

The U.S. Embassy coordinated directly with the host nation and a CA 

representative attended weekly working group meetings at the embassy. 

Extensive coordination between CA, the U.S. Embassy, USAID, relief 

agencies working in the local area, and the host nation government made this 

project a success. The President of the United States and President Alamen 

of Nicaragua visited this site to highlight the success achieved through U.S. 

interagency and host nation cooperation.110 

3. GOs, NGOs, PVOs and IOs can be a great resource for the U.S. 

military. 

NGOs/PVOs are diverse, independent, flexible and willing to operate 

in high-risk areas. One JA who deployed in support of the Hurricane Mitch 

relief effort stated that Doctors Without Borders was more situationally 

aware, mobile throughout the area, and self-sustainable than many military 

units. GOs, NGOs/PVOs, and IOs can be a great resource for the U.S. 

military. 

a. Interagency coordination enhances our situational awareness. 

(1) Damage Assessments 

During foreign disaster relief missions, USAID/OFDA will often have 

people on the ground in the affected area before the DoD. During major 

disaster responses, USAID/OFDA may dispatch a Disaster Assistance 

110 Captain Timothy M. Gilhool, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History of Joint 

Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 (February 

1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

45 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Response Team (DART). One of the first missions of the DART is to 

conduct an assessment of the affected areas, the damage, and the needs of 

the host nations and their people.111 The USAID/OFDA team will also work 

closely with NGOs/PVOs, which conduct their own damage assessments.

 This ability to quickly assess the situation and allocate resources is 

essential in the early stages of a disaster relief operation. Insufficient 

coordination during the Hurricane Mitch relief effort resulted in inefficient, 

repetitive, and incomplete assessments. Thus it would pay for the JA and 

other staff members to make contact with USAID/OFDA and the 

NGOs/PVOs in the area to gather critical information, increase situational 

awareness, and ensure unity of effort. 

Each assessment or survey should be designed to build upon previous 

surveys and expand the information base.112 Assessments should guide the 

military’s concept of the operation and allocation of resources—manpower, 

equipment and supplies. However, the allocation of resources by other U.S. 

agencies and organizations, IOs, and NGOs/PVOs must be coordinated to 

achieve economy of force and unity of effort. 

111 According to USAID/OFDA’s Field Operations Guide, the purpose of an initial assessment is to 

provide USAID/OFDA with information and recommendations to make timely decisions on the U.S. 

Government disaster response. Initial assessments: identify the impact a disaster has had on a society, and 

the ability of that society to cope; identify the most vulnerable populations, especially women and children 

that need to be targeted for assistance; identify the most urgent food and nonfood requirements and 

potential methods of providing them in the most effective manner; identify the level of response by the 

affected country and its internal capacities to cope with the situation, including those of the affected 

population; identify the priorities of the affected population and their preferred strategies for meeting those 

priorities; identify the level of response from other donor countries, UN relief organizations (UN), private 

voluntary organizations (PVOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and international organizations 

(IOs); make recommendations to OFDA/W and to USAlD/Embassy (if there) that define and prioritize the 

actions and resources needed for immediate response (recommendations should include possibilities for 

facilitating and expediting recovery and development); identify which types of in-depth assessments should 

be undertaken; highlight special concerns that would not immediately be evident to FDA/Washington or 

non-emergency persons; initial assessments should also provide baseline data as a reference for further 

monitoring. Monitoring systems should be identified so that relief officials will be able to determine 

whether a situation is improving or deteriorating. The systems must also be able to provide a means of 

measuring the effectiveness of relief activities. This guide is a “must read” for JAs deploying in support of 

foreign disaster relief operations. It is available for the general public from the Government Printing Office 

(ISBN 0-16-049721-3), or online at <http://www.info.usaid.gov/hum_response/ofda/fog/> (also on file 

with CLAMO). 

112 This guide is a “must read” for JAs deploying in support of foreign disaster relief operations. It is 

available for the general public from the Government Printing Office (ISBN 0-16-049721-3), or online at 

<http://www.info.usaid.gov/hum_response/ofda/fog/> (also on file with CLAMO). 

46 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

During the Hurricane Mitch relief efforts, coordination was 

insufficient. On some occasions, U.S. forces arrived in a town thought to be 

in dire need of assistance only to find other relief organizations or agencies 

had already responded.113 After Hurricane Mitch, multiple agencies and 

organizations were conducting assessments without coordination.114 

Assessments by OFDA and DoD were inadequate.115 These could have been 

augmented by NGO and PVO assessments. 

SOUTHCOM deployed assessment teams to begin determining 

requirements for a disaster relief task force. Other governmental 

agencies also conducted assessments. The assessment teams 

did not join efforts or share information. The JTF did not 

receive relevant information from many assessment teams in 

the JOA, such as the World Health Organization and the Pan 

American Health Organization, as well as information from the 

U.S. Army's Center for Health Promotion and Preventive 

Medicine. In addition, numerous teams conducting similar 

assessments led to mismatched expectations between host 

nation agencies and the task force actually executing the 

disaster relief mission.116 

The lesson learned is clear. In a disaster relief operation where the 

focus is saving lives and resources are scarce, every participating agency and 

organization must adhere to the principles of unity of effort and economy of 

force. This means the U.S. military must work closely with other key U.S. 

governmental organizations and agencies and with the IOs and NGOs/PVOs 

in the area of operations. In this operation, the U.S. military failed in large 

part to capitalize on this already existing wealth of knowledge and expertise. 

113 Some times this was an incident of the town or village trying to get all they could in outside support. 

Usually there was no bad intent and the wasted efforts were due to a lack of interagency and interorganization coordination. 

114 JOINT TASK FORCE AQUILA JOINT AFTER ACTION REVIEW, Observation #1 (Assessments): Multiple 

agencies conducting assessments (1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

115 See Memorandum from COL Gary L. Herrington, Civil Affairs officer, U.S. Army Peacekeeping 

Institute, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, to Director, U.S. Army Peacekeeping Institute, subject: Trip 

Report of Hurricanes Georges and Mitch After Action Reviews (AARs) (16 Mar. 1999) (copy on file with 

CLAMO). 

116 JOINT TASK FORCE AQUILA JOINT AFTER ACTION REVIEW, Observation #1 (Assessments): Multiple 

agencies conducting assessments (1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

47 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(2) Local information 

NGOs/PVOs, like CARE, often have established relationships with 

the host nation, and can be a great source of information about the area of 

operations, including specific legal information on topics such as leases, 

taxes, contacts and contracts. 117 NGOs/PVOs often establish working 

agreements with the host nation, which are similar to Status of Forces 

Agreements. See section IV.C. International Law. 

One deployed JA stated that “JTF-A attorneys would have done well 

to have POCs with major agencies such as USAID or OFDA prior to 

deploying.”118 The USAID Representative at the U.S. Embassy, Managua, 

Ms. Lynn Vega, had been in country for eight years when Hurricane Mitch 

struck. She knew local representatives and knew how to work within the 

local system.119 One of the OFDA DART team members120 was Nicaraguan 

and had a sister who was the head of the Nicaraguan Red Cross. These 

contacts could prove invaluable to JAs. 

The U.S. military, however, must be cautious not to give the wrong 

impression. NGOs/PVOs should be viewed as a source of information, not 

intelligence. NGOs/PVOs do not want to tarnish their neutral image or risk 

damaging their working relationship with the host nation, local government 

and local populace. The U.S. military must work with NGOs/PVOs, share 

and coordinate assets and abilities, and exchange information while keeping 

in mind the neutral position of most NGOs/PVOs. 

117 Mr. Yan Schollaert, Country Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and Military 

Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on 

file with CLAMO). 

118 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 Jan. 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

119 Ms. Lynn Vega, USAID Nicaragua Mission, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). 

120 Mr. Ricardo Bermudis. 

48 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

b. Funding and support. 

USAID/OFDA often requests DoD assistance for specific activities 

that fall within the USAID/OFDA mandate of saving lives and alleviating 

suffering. The use of Army O&M funds for humanitarian assistance 

operations is restricted. See section IV.D. Fiscal Issues. When 

USAID/OFDA requests DoD assistance for specific activities, the request is 

generally on a reimbursable basis. Such requests are made in advance, 

through appropriate channels, and should have a pre-established maximum 

funding limitation. During and after Hurricane Mitch, USAID/OFDA 

established two fund citations for DoD activities: transport of relief supplies 

and road/bridge construction and engineering activities. These accounts 

funded portions of the U.S. military response. See section III.D.10. Fiscal 

Issues of Other Agencies, subsection a. USAID/OFDA. 

The U.S. military often participates in disaster relief operations solely 

as a USAID/OFDA partner. Because USAID/OFDA funds significant 

portions of the military involvement, the two organizations must work 

closely together. 

Another example of support was the issue of health care. During 

redeployment, JTF-ES sought Level III health care from the host nation, if 

needed, while the field hospital was drawn down. JTF-Aquila attorneys 

contacted MILGROUP personnel and learned that the memorandum of 

understanding between the host nation military hospital and the permanent 

party U.S. military also covered JTF personnel.121 

4. NGOs and PVOs often have a different focus, time frame and culture 

than the military. 

If you give someone a fish you feed him for a day. If you teach 

someone to fish you feed him for a lifetime.122 

121 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

122 Chinese Proverb. Also attributed to Kwan-Tzu as “If you give a man a fish he will have a single meal. 

If you teach him how to fish he will eat all his life.” See QuoteWorld.Org. 

49 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

In working with IOs and NGOs/PVOs, military personnel must 

recognize that these organizations have a focus and time frame different 

from the military’s. Many NGOs/PVOs focus on the long term and 

sustainability. NGOs/PVOs are in the nations they help for the long haul, 

and many were there prior to the military. The U.S. military is called to help 

in foreign disaster relief only when the situation is beyond the response 

capability of the host nation, PVOs and NGOs and U.S. government 

agencies that normally respond (i.e., USAID/OFDA). 

The military is used for its surge capability and is in and out, focused 

on the short-term. CARE’s Programming Principles, for example, (detailed 

at Appendix B-6: International Organizations (IOs), Non-Governmental 

Organizations (NGOs), and Private Organizations (PVOs)) show that its 

focus is on making people and governments self-sustaining. These are long 

term goals compared to the shorter-term goals of the U.S. military in disaster 

relief operations. Some differences between NGOs/PVOs and the military 

are reflected in Figure B-4. 

50 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Figure B-4: Differences Between NGOs and PVOs and the Military. 

123 

A disaster’s damage potential is the product of risk times 

vulnerability. Reducing vulnerability is one of the aims of many NGOs, like 

CARE. For example, among other projects, CARE planted trees to prevent 

future mudslides.124 As a result, the organizations have a different 

operational tempo. While many NGOs/PVOs respond immediately to 

disasters, some NGOs/PVOs and local governments work at a slower pace 

and respond differently than the U.S. military. One lesson learned is that 

each organization must learn and respect the focus, abilities and constraints 

of the other. 

123 U.S. Army Peacekeeping Institute, NGOs & IOs Page: Civil Military Operations Center (CMOC) Brief 

(visited Apr. 24, 2000) <http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usacsl/divisions/pki/ngo/cmoc/sld001.htm>. 

124 Mr. Yan Schollaert, Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). 

51 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

You can destroy as much or more by giving away everything 

free, as you can by giving nothing at all.125 

Governmental Organizations and NGOs/PVOs with a long-term 

presence better appreciate the potential negative impacts of some actions. 

For example, a sudden, massive influx of certain types of relief supplies may 

put local merchants out of business.126 The military can benefit from 

NGOs/PVOs’ understanding of local conditions and relief impacts. 

Another example of the need for the military to learn from the longterm focus of NGOs/PVOs is the standard of medical care provided. Dr. 

Lester Martinez-Lopez said we cause problems when we go into a country 

and render high U.S. standards of care, then pull out and drop the level of 

care back to what it was before. He proposed that we render a standard of 

care compatible with local practice. Dr. Martinez-Lopez recommends that 

the military establish medical rules of practice: Tell the soldiers whom they 

may treat, where they may provide treatment and what standard of care they 

may provide. For example, a boy was run over by a non-U.S. vehicle. He 

was brought to U.S. forces for care and evacuated to a civilian hospital in 

Miami. This decision was expensive, and provided care in one isolated case 

at a level far above local standards. The evacuation also raised related fiscal 

issues. There was no pre-approved funding source for the $500,000 hospital 

bill.127 

Conversely, NGOs/PVOs must respect the military’s focus and 

limitations. U.S. forces are not intended to serve as dedicated logistical 

support for other organizations. A lesson learned for JAs and their 

commanders is to carefully review NGO/PVO requests. While most 

organizations made very reasonable requests for assistance that 

complimented the U.S. relief effort, a few NGOs/PVOs made unreasonable 

requests. One small charity organization doing disaster relief in Honduras 

125 Mr. Yan Schollaert, Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). 

126 See Mr. Peter D. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office 

of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operations’ Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

127 COL and DR Lester Martinez-Lopez, Address at Joint Urban operations Conference, Bolling Air Force 

Base, Washington, DC (Apr. 14, 1999). 

52 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

aggressively sought military assistance in moving shipments of goods 

transported under the Denton amendment.128 U.S. forces had to review these 

requests cautiously to avoid allocating limited logistical resources to the 

detriment of our own missions. (For more on the fiscal constraints on 

handling Denton Amendment goods, see section D. Fiscal Law). 

5. Interagency coordination is required through redeployment. 

Interagency coordination at lower levels must continue through all 

deployment stages. Redeployment may trigger unanticipated coordination 

requirements. Agricultural inspections of units redeploying to the U.S. must 

be coordinated with USDA in detail and well in advance. 

JTF Aguila began coordination with USDA approximately six weeks 

before agricultural inspectors were required in country for redeployment 

inspections. Although the USDA was aware of the dates and requirements 

for inspectors, due to holidays and unclear funding guidance orders for the 

inspectors were not finalized until two days before the JTF required the 

inspectors. This did not give the inspectors time to get passports, visas and 

airline tickets to begin inspections on the required dates. 

Although the JTF provided specific dates for the inspectors to come 

based on work completion and ship arrival schedules, the inspectors did not 

arrive on those dates. For example, the inspector arrived in Nicaragua two 

weeks prior to the ship loading dates, while the inspector for El Salvador 

arrived after the first ship had already begun loading. Inspectors did not 

remain in country throughout redeployment operations. Instead, inspectors 

stayed for short periods of time then returned home, requiring the JTF to 

coordinate for additional inspectors at the last minute. 129 

JAs must anticipate these requirements. Redeployment can be 

delayed due to a failure to coordinate. 

128 Email Message from LTC D. McCallum, U.S. Army South, to Captain Daniel P. Saumur, Joint Task 

Force Bravo, Honduras, subject: fwd: RE: JTF-BRAVO SITREP (12 Nov. 1998 6:34AM) (on file with 

CLAMO); email message from Captain Daniel P. Saumur, Joint Task Force Bravo, Honduras, to Antonio J. 

Vazquez, subject: Legal Matter (12 Nov. 1998 time unknown) (on file with CLAMO). 

129 JOINT TASK FORCE AQUILA JOINT AFTER ACTION REVIEW, Observation #7 

(Deployment/Redeployment): Coordination of United States Agriculture Inspector (1999) (on file with 

CLAMO). 

53 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

6. Interagency coordination is improving.
 

Despite insufficient interagency and inter-organization coordination 

during the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, organizations are taking steps to 

improve integration in the future. The U.S. military, other U.S. 

governmental organizations, and NGOs/PVOs have recognized the need for 

enhanced cooperation. These efforts should be encouraged and continued. 

a. SOUTHCOM’s Efforts to Better Coordinate 

In 1998, U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) assumed responsibility 

for the Caribbean area from Atlantic Command. SOUTHCOM proactively 

began establishing contacts with Caribbean countries such as Barbados, 

Jamaica, and Trinidad. The SOUTHCOM Surgeon’s Office is working with 

the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) to enhance the 

SOUTHCOM-PAHO liaison efforts during training and operations. 

SOUTHCOM is coordinating with the Caribbean Disaster Emergency 

Response Agency (CDERA) to establish four regional disaster supplies 

warehouses (Antigua, Barbados, Jamaica, and Trinidad) under SOUTCOM’s 

Humanitarian Assistance Program. 

In addition, the $11 million Central America disaster mitigation program 

approved by President Clinton gave SOUTHCOM and USAID/OFDA 

incentive to improve coordination. Both organizations focused on: (1) 

Enhancing information sharing; (2) Assessing national and regional disaster 

preparedness and response capacity; (3) Evaluating local military capacities 

to respond to disasters; and (4) Providing training in disaster management 

and response. The SOUTHCOM Director of Logistics took the lead in 

strengthening SOUTHCOM’s partnership with the Center for Disaster 

Management and Humanitarian Assistance, Florida Volunteer Corps for the 

Caribbean-Latin America (FAVA-CA), and the Center for Coordinating the 

Prevention of Natural Disasters in Central America (CEPRDENAC). 130 

130 LTC Jeffrey F. Addicott, Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, U.S. Army Southern Command, Address at the 

Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power 

Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

54 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

b. OFDA’s Efforts to Better Coordinate 

USAID/OFDA proactively sought DoD coordination in many matters 

during the relief effort, including USAID/OFDA-funded airlift operations, 

the use of Soto Cano Air Base as a relief operations hub, USAID/OFDA 

funded construction and engineering activities, and the use of the 

USAID/OFDA stockpile in Panama. Prior to the arrival of Mitch, 

USAID/OFDA provided approximately $250,000 to SOUTHCOM for 

search and rescue operations, emergency evacuation, and transport of 

supplies. During initial landfall, OFDA positioned an additional $750,000 

for rotary and fixed wing operations (aerial assessment, search and rescue, 

emergency evacuation, and supplies transport). 131 During operations, 

USAID/OFDA had liaison with Soto Cano Air Base, the MILGRP in 

Tegucigalpa, the MILGRP and aviation units in Managua and San Salvador, 

and SOUTHCOM at San Jose and Miami. 

7. One proposal for enhanced coordination: Use PDD 56. 

Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 56, Managing Complex 

Contingencies, was intended to improve interagency coordination, based on 

lessons learned during previous U.S. involvement in contingency operations. 

Although the National Security Council (NSC) did conduct agency 

coordination meetings, the U.S. did not directly apply PDD 56 in its 

response to Hurricane Mitch. 132 (The unclassified White House White 

Paper summarizing the classified PDD is at Appendix B-5: Presidential 

Decision Directive (PDD) 56: Managing Complex Contingency 

Operations.) 

131 Mr. Peter D.R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office 

of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

132 See Memorandum from COL Gary L. Herrington, Civil Affairs officer, U.S. Army Peacekeeping 

Institute, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, to Director, U.S. Army Peacekeeping Institute, subject: Trip 

report of Hurricanes Georges and Mitch After Action Reviews (AARs) (16 Mar. 1999) (copy on file with 

CLAMO). See also Rowan Scarborough, Study Hits White House on Peacekeeping Missions, 

WASHINGTON TIMES, Dec. 6, 1999, at A1. 

55 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Figure B-5, PDD 56 Structure. 

The decision to implement PDD 56 will always be made at the highest 

levels. However, even if PDD 56 is not followed, certain of its underlying 

principles could be applied at lower levels and warrant consideration. By its 

own words, “The PDD is designed to ensure that the lessons learned— 

including proven planning processes and implementation mechanisms—will 

be incorporated into the interagency process on a regular basis.”133 PDD 56 

could be used as a framework for contingency planning for future foreign 

disaster relief operations that are regional in scope. PDD 56 calls for a 

Deputies Committee (a committee of the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the 

Deputy Secretary of State, etc.) to establish interagency working groups to 

assist in policy development, planning and execution of complex 

contingency operations. The Deputies Committee is to form an Executive 

Committee (ExCom) to supervise the day-to-day management of U.S. 

participation. In addition, the chair of the ExCom is to designate an agency 

to lead a legal and fiscal advisory sub-group, whose role is to consult with 

the ExCom to ensure that tasks assigned by the ExCom can be performed by 

the assigned agencies within legal and fiscal constraints. 

PDD 56 also calls for a political-military implementation plan (“polmil plan”) to articulate an integrated, interagency concept of operations and 

133 White House White Paper on Presidential Decision Directive 56, The Clinton Administration’s Policy 

on Managing Complex Contingency Operations (May 1997) < http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd56.htm>. 

56 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

to include a comprehensive situation assessment, mission statement, agency 

objectives, and desired end state. The plan should outline an integrated 

concept of operations to synchronize agency efforts, identify the primary 

preparatory issues and tasks for conducting the operation, and address major 

functional/mission area tasks. The end result is centralized planning and 

decentralized execution. PDD 56 also envisions interagency rehearsals 

based on the pol-mil plans, interagency AARs, and interagency training. 

Unfortunately, during the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, decentralized 

execution occurred, but without the interagency-level centralized planning. 

Even if high-level, interagency coordination and planning envisioned by 

PDD 56 proves impossible due to bureaucratic boundaries, the interagency 

working group concept could be applied at a lower level. In hindsight, 

executing PDD 56 during Hurricane Mitch relief efforts -type framework 

might have prevented the necessity of relearning a key lesson captured in the 

text of the unclassified PDD release: 

While agencies of government have developed independent 

capacities to respond to complex emergencies, military and 

civilian agencies should operate in a synchronized manner 

through effective interagency management and the use of 

special mechanisms to coordinate agency efforts. Integrated 

planning and effective management of agency operations early 

on in an operation can avoid delays, reduce pressure on the 

military to expand its involvement in unplanned ways, and 

create unity of effort within an operation that is essential for 

success of the mission.134 

The third diagram at Appendix B-1: U.S. Military Involvement Process for 

Disaster relief Operations, depicts the PDD 56 process for managing 

complex contingency operations, which can include foreign disaster relief 

operations. 

Many of the problems PDD 56 was designed to avoid occurred after 

Mitch: delays,135 pressures on the military to expand its involvement in 

134 White House White Paper on Presidential Decision Directive 56, The Clinton Administration’s Policy 

on Managing Complex Contingency Operations (May 1997) < http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd56.htm>. 

135 For example, it took four days of phone calls and coordination between USAID Mission Nicaragua (Ms. 

Lynn Vega), the Defense Attaché’ Officer (DAO) at the U.S. Embassy, the U.S. Ambassador (Lino 

Gutierrez), and General Wilhelm to get the first U.S. helicopters into Nicaragua. While this was due in part 

57 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

unplanned ways,136 failure to expand involvement where desirable,137 and a 

lack of unity of effort.138 

Unified commands could adopt a process similar to that prescribed by 

PDD 56 for regional planning or crisis management. The Handbook for 

Management of Complex Contingencies is a useful reference.139 The 

National Defense University (NDU) developed a U.S. Interagency Complex 

Contingency Operations Planning Decision Support System (PDSS), which 

is available from NDU.140 The computerized system is designed to assist 

interagency planning, 

with special focus on identifying lead entities for each phase 

and in each operational area. This focus is important to address 

the fluid nature of situations that require interagency responses. 

Each situation might call for an entirely different organizational 

to political reluctance on the part of the Nicaraguan government, it was also attributable to less than 

desirable interagency communication. Ms. Lynn Vega, USAID Nicaragua Mission, Address at the Center 

for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

136 See discussions elsewhere in this text addressing issues such as requests for medical care in non-affected 

regions of the host nations, requests for construction of non-relief-related facilities, and requests for 

improper use of air transportation. 

137 For example, additional military personnel should have been sent early to Nicaragua to coordinate air 

movement. Unlike the other affected countries, there was no MILGRP in Nicaragua. Only two of the six 

Defense Attaché’ Office (DAO) slots at the U.S. Embassy were filled, and there was no Air Mobility 

Command (AMC) station manager at the Managua airport. Planes arrived at all hours, often with little or 

no notice. Air coordination fell solely on the two DAO personnel, a civilian and a sergeant. They were 

required to coordinate airport duties for all helicopter and military flights until JTF Build Hope arrived the 

last week of November. They processed 179 helicopter sorties moving 763,200 pounds of food and relief 

supplies and the receipt of 126 military aircraft. This meant they were unavailable in the DAO at the 

Embassy to handle other important, incoming issues. 

138 For example, agencies and organizations conducted overlapping assessments and failed to share 

information. As a result, each agency and organization operated off an incomplete picture of the situation. 

For example, CINCSOUTH did not deploy a HAST. Rather than allocating one of the first helicopters sent 

to the disaster area to conduct assessments so that a plan of response could be developed, they were 

immediately assigned transport duties. In addition, two separate operations were set up for coordinating 

Denton Amendment relief supplies flights. The DAO at the U.S. Embassy was responsible for 

coordinating and receiving all Denton flights in Nicaragua. However, OFDA also set up a Denton 

Operations Center with the intent to expedite the program. Applications were being received and approved 

by two different agencies—DoD and OFDA. Ms. Lynn Vega, USAID Nicaragua Mission, Address at the 

Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power 

Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

139 The Handbook is available at http://www.pdd56.com/handbook_alt.htm. 

140 The PDSS is described at http://www.pdd56.com/handbook_docs/appendix_F.htm. 

58 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

structure from the previous. This differs from the deliberate 

planning process employed by the U.S. military in which lines 

of command remain fairly consistent from one contingency 

situation to another within any given regional command 

141 

arena. 

Figure B-6, PDSS Contents
 

141 Id. 

59 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

C. INTERNATIONAL LAW 

1. Is there a Status of Forces Agreement? 

Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs)142 answer a multitude of legal 

questions that arise during a deployment. Issues such as criminal 

jurisdiction, customs, immigration, taxes, claims procedures, and even the 

carrying of weapons are normally addressed in a SOFA. Acquisition and 

Cross Servicing Agreements (ACSAs) provide a simplified means of 

acquiring or transferring supplies and services to the armed forces or 

government of another country with which the U.S. has an ACSA.143 The 

Unified Command responsible for the AOR where you are deploying will be 

able to provide information regarding SOFAs/ACSAs in effect. 

When U.S. Forces deployed for Hurricane Mitch, the only country 

with which the U.S. had a SOFA was Honduras. See Appendix C-4 for a 

copy of the Honduran SOFA. The CJCS issued a message containing a 

format for the exchange of diplomatic notes on the status of U.S. personnel. 

See Appendix C-2. A Diplomatic Note (DIPNOTE) was negotiated with 

Nicaragua regarding the legal status of U.S. Forces participating in disaster 

relief operations. See Appendix C-1 for a copy of the Nicaraguan 

DIPNOTES. SOFA negotiations were conducted with Guatemala,144 but a 

SOFA agreement was never reached. JAs must be prepared to practice law 

without a SOFA. 

JAs must also realize that every SOFA is unique. Each SOFA must 

be analyzed to determine its specific provisions before advising commanders 

on the status of U.S. forces. This was especially important for Hurricane 

Mitch operations because the area of responsibility (AOR) covered four 

countries and the U.S. had agreements with three of these countries. As an 

example, the Honduran SOFA provided for “shared” criminal jurisdiction, 

whereby either Honduras or the U.S. would have criminal jurisdiction over 

an U.S. service member depending on the nature of the crime and the 

142 As used in this section, the term “SOFA” also includes “Exchange of Notes” and “Diplomatic Notes.” 

143 ACSAs will not be discussed in this book because the U.S. did not have ACSAs with any of the 

countries we were assisting or who were participating in relief operations. However, JAs need to be aware 

that ACSAs may be applicable in future disaster relief operations. 

144 The U.S. did have a Mutual Assistance Agreement with Guatemala, but this did not address the status of 

U.S. forces for a disaster relief operation. See Appendix C-3. 

60 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

nationality of the victim. The Nicaraguan DIPNOTES provided exclusive 

criminal jurisdiction to the U.S. for all offense committed by U.S. forces.145 

Additionally, the Foreign Claims Act usually does not apply to foreign 

countries in which there is a SOFA that addresses claims.146 If a SOFA 

addresses claims, the claims provisions are usually covered in a separate 

article of the SOFA.147 

Similar variations may occur in the areas of customs, entry/exit 

requirements, landing fees, and force protection. JAs must ensure they 

clarify the relevant provisions of each SOFA before advising commanders 

and others on the status of U.S. forces. The Unified Command SJA will be 

able to answer SOFA-related questions of JAs deployed in their AOR. 

2. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and Private Voluntary 

Organizations (PVOs) may have their own agreements with the host 

nation. 

JAs should be aware that several NGOs and PVOs have country 

agreements with many of the countries in which they operate. Organizations 

with a long-standing relationship to a country or region, such as CARE or 

Doctors without Borders, have negotiated these agreements to better 

facilitate their operations. These agreements are similar to a SOFA in that 

they address the payment of fees and taxes, customs and immigration 

requirements, and the “status” of members of the NGO/PVO in country. 

These agreements only apply to members of the NGO or PVO, not to U.S. 

Forces operating in that country. These agreements may become relevant to 

U.S. forces when NGO/PVO relief supplies are shipped through airfields 

administered by the U.S. 

3. Know the rules regarding the negotiation of international agreements. 

JAs must be conscious of the rules regarding the negotiation and 

conclusion of international agreements. When entering countries where the 

U.S. does not have a SOFA, JAs may be asked to advise on, or participate in 

145 U.S. forces in Nicaragua were given a status equal to that given to the administrative and technical staff 

of U.S. embassies; this status is often referred to as “A & T” status. 

146 See 10 USC § 2734a (this provision is commonly referred to as the International Agreement Claims 

Act). 

147 See NATO SOFA, Article XVIII, for an example. 

61 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

the negotiation of, agreements to facilitate the conduct of operations. 

Agreements regarding transportation, the purchase of goods and the 

procurement of services are common. These agreements could be considered 

“international agreements” and if so, trigger a multitude of requirements 

before negotiations can begin. 

The primary reference for DoD personnel involved in international 

agreements is Department of Defense Directive 5530.3, International 

Agreements.

148 This directive defines what an international agreement is, 

who the approval authorities are for the various types of international 

agreements, and the requirements for obtaining approval to negotiate and 

conclude an international agreement. The bottom line is no DoD personnel 

may negotiate or conclude an international agreement without the prior 

written permission of the appropriate approval authority. Approval authority 

for certain types of international agreements has been delegated to the 

Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, who has further delegated this authority to 

the Unified Commanders.149 All questions regarding the negotiation and 

conclusion of international agreements should be directed to the Unified 

Command SJA of that AOR. 

4. Know the host nation governments, their organization and their agenda. 

The central player in foreign disaster relief operations is the 

government of the affected nation. Working with host nation governments 

and understanding the intricacies of both international and local politics 

requires the sensitivity and dexterity expected of judge advocates. Even in 

times of need, governments have an agenda, an agenda that might impact the 

mission or conflict with U.S. military means and methods. Nonetheless, we 

must work with these officials in ministering to the needs of their nation and 

people, and learn their ways of operating. 

148 JAs should also consult CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTRUCTION 2300.01, INTERNATIONAL 

AGREEMENTS (15 Sep. 1994 with Change 1, 19 Aug. 1996), which provides additional instructions and 

implementing guidance to DoD personnel involved with international agreements. 

149 See CJCSI 2300.01, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTRUCTION 2300.01, INTERNATIONAL 

AGREEMENTS (15 Sep. 1994 with Change 1, 19 Aug. 1996). 

62 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

a. Understand host nation objectives. 

The experience of U.S. military doctors participating in the relief 

efforts serves as a good example of the interaction of the military relief 

mission with host nation government and politics. One doctor observed that 

host nation goals may vary and may not be limited to the actual health care 

delivered. In El Salvador, they had problems with timely delivery of Class 

VIII (medical) supplies for medical humanitarian assistance missions. The 

Ministry of Health asked the military medical personnel to perform the 

missions and they would make up the Class VIII shortages. When planning 

the last two missions, one each in San Miguel and Usultan, the Ministry of 

Health requested that U.S. doctors spend three full days in each location. 

They stated that the area was dominated by the opposition party, who would 

feel slighted if anyone desiring care did not receive it. Thus the government 

attempted to use American delivered medical care for political gain. In 

Guatemala, the host nation wanted the U.S. military to conduct medical 

missions in the north, well away from any Hurricane Mitch damage. In the 

end, the CINCSO’s intent was made clear through the MILGROUP 

commander, and medical missions were limited to the southern coast, which 

had been affected by Hurricane Mitch.150 

Host nations naturally and understandably sought U.S. assistance in 

many areas. However, many requests were outside the scope of the mission 

and beyond fiscal and other restraints. For example requests were made for 

basketball courts, reviewing stands, fences and more.151 There was a 

problem with localities falsely claiming no relief had made it to them in an 

effort to get more. When one such claim was investigated, it was found that 

CARE, the Ministry of Health, and the World Food Program had already 

tended to the area.152 

It is also important to be familiar with the internal workings of the 

host nation government. For example, Nicaragua distinguishes between a 

150 JOINT TASK FORCE AQUILA JOINT AFTER ACTION REVIEW, Observation #23 (Medical): Host Nation 

Government Goals (1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

151 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides on file with CLAMO). 

152 Ms. Lynn Vega, USAID Nicaragua Mission, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). 

63 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

state of emergency and a state of disaster. For Hurricane Mitch, the 

government declared a state of emergency, which grants broader powers to 

the Army, such as the authority to requisition private property. 

b. Anticipate host nation issues. 

Judge advocates should be involved in issues of international law, 

politics and diplomacy. But JAs must know their boundaries, the proper role 

of the State Department and the embassy or mission, and recognize that they 

as JAs are not instruments of policy. Nonetheless, deployed attorneys need 

to exercise diplomatic skills with host nation military and civilian personnel. 

Diplomacy is often best coordinated with Civil Affairs. The paragraphs 

below reflect the observations and lessons learned recorded by then First 

Lieutenant Mark Hannig in this arena.153 

(1) Diplomatic Notes, Agreements and Status of Forces 

JTF Aguila (JTF-A) attorneys worked with host nation personnel at 

several points throughout the operations. At the outset of the deployment, 

the United States had not negotiated a diplomatic note or a SOFA with 

Nicaragua. The Nicaraguan government sought disaster relief and 

humanitarian assistance from the United States through a series of oral and 

written correspondences. When the first attorney arrived in the joint area of 

operations, negotiations were underway. Negotiators called upon the JAG 

Corps for help. Captain Tiernan Dolan assisted those who were negotiating 

the final diplomatic note. A similar situation occurred in Guatemala. Mere 

correspondence had invited U.S. personnel into the country, with the 

protection of a Mutual Assistance Agreement signed in 1955. On 20 

January 1999, U.S. Embassy personnel were still negotiating the terms of 

JTF-A operations with Guatemalan officials. JTF-A personnel had 

completely redeployed from Guatemala by 25 January 1999. 

An additional host nation concern in the diplomatic notes and 

agreements is force protection. (See also Section E. Force Protection.) 

Generally, our Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) with host nations 

include provisions which state that U.S. soldiers are allowed to carry 

153 See Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

64 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

weapons for their own protection. Based on concerns by the Nicaraguan 

government over the possible perception of such language, that provision 

was deleted from the Nicaragua SOFA. It was tacitly understood that 

soldiers could carry weapons since it was not prohibited, but would carry 

them discretely. 

(2) Host Nation Military and Bases 

JTF-A attorneys also worked with host nation military officials 

concerning JTF bases. In the cases of Comalapa, El Salvador and Base 

Felipe Cruz, Guatemala, Task Force El Salvador (TF-ES) personnel 

outnumbered the permanent party population of the host nation installations. 

TF-ES vehicles, aircraft and other assets also outnumbered the assets of the 

HN installation. Despite our superior numbers, the JTF-A commanders 

remained sensitive to the needs and desires of our hosts. This required 

negotiations and constant communication. Civil Affairs personnel served as 

the primary liaison with the commanders of the HN military installation. 

However, from time to time, JTF-A attorneys helped in negotiations. Two 

examples include, land-use agreements in El Salvador and pre-positioning of 

materials and equipment by JTF-A personnel for the follow-on New 

Horizons projects in Guatemala. See section G. Administrative Law. 

(3) Diplomatic Clearances 

After standing up a JTF within multiple sovereign countries, 

coordinating diplomatic clearances across each of the countries was a great 

challenge. Each of the countries has various processing times to approve the 

clearance (4 hours for El Salvador, 8 hours for Nicaragua, and 24 hours for 

Guatemala and Honduras). Of course, the schedules of those commanders 

and others often change on short notice. Other aircraft missions 

(MEDEVAC and airlift) also get modified on short notice outside the normal 

processing window. The JA should work with the G3 Air to determine 

diplomatic clearance requirements for each country. When possible, we 

should coordinate blanket diplomatic clearances across the joint area of 

operations to facilitate greater flexibility. 154 

154 JOINT TASK FORCE AQUILA JOINT AFTER ACTION REVIEW, Observation #9 (Operations): Diplomatic 

Clearance within JOA (Air) (1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

65 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(4) Local Citizen Concerns 

Many parts of Central America operate under a system of 

departments/prefectures. Each has a civilian government and a military 

commander. These two individuals generally control the economic 

development in their jurisdictions. People who live in their jurisdictions can 

seek assistance and recourse from them. One host nation civilian, a 

claimant, repeatedly petitioned the host nation base commander, who was 

the department military commander. The status of the claim concerned the 

commander, who had a duty to look after the welfare of citizens living in his 

department. The claims commission adjudicated the claim and paid the 

claimant. However, JTF-A attorneys were compelled to diplomacy and to 

ensure the commander that we would compensate his citizens who had been 

harmed by U.S. negligence. 

(5) Local Law 

In order to adjudicate particular claims, JTF-A attorneys sought the 

legal advice of a host nation attorney in San Jose, Guatemala. With the help 

of Civil Affairs, they were referred to an attorney by the commander of the 

host nation military base. Calling upon this local attorney allowed the JTF-A 

to successfully adjudicate the claims using host nation law and custom. 

The lessons learned in this area are best summarized in the words of a 

young Judge Advocate who was there, First Lieutenant Mark Hannig: 

Although not their primary mission, deployed attorneys may 

have opportunity to exercise diplomacy with host nation 

military and civilian personnel. This is an opportunity to learn 

about local customs and build relationships. Attorneys must be 

careful to operate within their authority. Deployed attorneys 

should seek guidance from Civil Affairs personnel regarding 

local customs and traditions while interacting with host nation 

personnel. They should also seek to educate themselves about 

the local law, culture and society so that they may more 

effectively execute their legal duties. Prior to deployment and 

during deployment, attorneys should make every effort to 

66 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

interact with the local community. This interaction will enrich
 

their advice to commanders. 155
 

155 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

67 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

D. FISCAL LAW
 

The most important thing in buying real estate is location, 

location, location, and the three most important things in 

dealing with legal issues associated with disasters [are] 

funding, funding, funding. 

LTC Jeff Addicott156 

The Hurricane Mitch relief effort was a three phased operation. Each 

phase presented unique fiscal law questions, and required a variety of 

funding mechanisms. The first JAs on the ground realized that funding 

issues would be complex.157 For this mission, there were several types of 

special purpose funding available. JAs and commanders were confronted 

with at least five separate funding authorities. USARSO held the funds, and 

allocated them to the JTFs. Sorting out the permissible uses of each type of 

funding proved challenging. This section reviews the dominant lessons 

learned in the fiscal law arena. 

1. Deployed judge advocates must have or develop expertise in fiscal law 

and contract law. 

One of the most significant lessons from previous deployments is the 

need for procurement and fiscal law expertise in peace operations.158 Fiscal 

law and procurement law issues were both pervasive and time-consuming in 

operations in Haiti and the Balkans.159 The same was true for the foreign 

disaster relief operations in Central America. 

156 Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey Addicott, Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, U.S. Army Southern Command, 

Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (23-24 April 

1999) (Power Point slides on file with CLAMO). 

157 Email from Captain Daniel P. Samur, JTF Bravo, to Colonel Daniel McCallum, USARSO (Nov. 11, 

1998) (copy on file with CLAMO). 

158 See CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS, LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN THE BALKANS, 

1995-1998: LESSONS LEARNED FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES, at 142 (13 Nov. 1998); see also CENTER FOR LAW 

AND MILITARY OPERATIONS, LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN HAITI, 1994-1995: LESSONS LEARNED 

FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES, at 138 (11 Dec. 1995). 

159 See CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS, LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN HAITI, 1994­

1995: LESSONS LEARNED FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES (11 Dec. 1995) and CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY 

OPERATIONS, LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN THE BALKANS, 1995-1998: LESSONS LEARNED FOR 

JUDGE ADVOCATES (13 Nov. 1998). 

68 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

A fundamental principle of fiscal law is that the obligation and 

expenditure of appropriated funds are subject to stringent purpose, time, and 

amount controls.160 In foreign disaster relief operations, as in most 

deployments, the purpose requirement can become a pitfall for well meaning 

commanders and staff. In the Hurricane Mitch relief operations, attorneys 

routinely received inquiries concerning the propriety of various 

expenditures. Questions arose concerning the use of these funds for base 

construction projects; morale, welfare and recreation; awards, including unit 

coins and certificates of achievement; gifts to foreign dignitaries; and postdisaster transportation of humanitarian assistance supplies provided by nongovernmental organizations. These issues are discussed below.

 Five separate funding sources were available during the operation. 

Attorneys must understand each category of funding available to the 

deployed headquarters and the applicable restrictions on each funding 

source. They must closely monitor expenditures, in conjunction with the 

comptroller and contracting officer. The JTF appointed a J-8, the resource 

manager. 161 The J-8 became a major player for this mission. 

One JA summarized the issues this way: “Where’s the money? Who 

has the money? What kind of money is it? What law applies?”162 

USARSO held the money for the operation, and passed it to the JTFs. Each 

JTF had a JA, who encountered similar issues. The possibility of 

inconsistent advice among the JTFs was present, but did not materialize. 

The importance of communication between the several JTF JAs and between 

the JTF JAs and USARSO cannot be overstated. 

Operational law attorneys must be trained in the fiscal law applicable 

to contingency, humanitarian, and disaster relief missions. They must have 

access to applicable statutory and regulatory guidance, in either electronic or 

paper format. The fiscal law discussion in the Operational Law Handbook 

provides an excellent summary of each type of funding. However, JAs 

deploying to relief operations should supplement this information with the 

160 See 10 U.S.C. §§ 1301, 1341, and 1502(a) (addressing purpose, amount and time, respectively). 

161 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). Transcript at 145. 

162 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). Transcript at 142. 

69 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Fiscal Law Deskbook and key source materials, many of which are 

contained on the Center’s Deployed Judge Advocate Resource Library on 

CD-ROM. 

When possible, deploying attorneys should identify fund sources, and 

the legal guidance pertaining to each, prior to deployment. Attorneys 

without fiscal law backgrounds should identify a point of contact for 

consultation on such issues prior to and during deployment. 

 “FUERTE APOYO” 

OSD 

Defense Security 

Cooperation Agency 

HQDA 

JCS 

STATE DEPT 

JTF-B JTFAGUILA 

USARSO 

O0HDACA FUNDS 

-Up to $45M Initially 

OMA/MPA ($43M/$9M) 

-USARSO($8M) 

-FORSCOM($30M) 

-MEDCOM($2M) 

-USACE($2M) 

-INSCOM($1M) 

-HQDA($9M) 

DoD DRAWDOWN($75M) 

-Army($52M) 

-Air Force($18M) 

-Navy($5m) 

CINC INITITATIVE 

FUNDS ($25M) 

OFDA ($10M) 

HONDURAS 

RESOURCE MANAGER EL SALVADOR, NICARAGUA, 

GUATEMALA RESOURCE MANAGER 

HURRICANE MITCH FUNDING 

Figure D-1, Operation Fuerte Apoyo Funding Streams

 2. Judge advocates will contend with multiple sources of funding during 

foreign disaster assistance operations. 

Immediately following the disaster, the President approved $75 

million in drawdown authority “to save lives and assist in reestablishing 

basic infrastructure....”163 The drawdown authority allowed DoD to use 

existing resources (both articles and services) in the relief effort. According 

163 Report to Congress, U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), at 5 (Mar. 29, 1999).

70 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

to the General Accounting Office (GAO), DoD spent approximately $223 

million on these efforts. To initially fund Phases I and II (the emergency 

and rehabilitation phases), DoD used: 

•	 $75 million in drawdown authority, 

•	 $50 million in Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Action 

(OHDACA) funds, 

•	 $20 million in CINC Initiative Funds (CIFs), and 

•	 $10 million transferred from Office of Foreign Disaster 

Assistance.164 

These funds were later replenished through specific appropriations. 

According to GAO, these funding sources were used as follows: 

•	 Drawdown was used primarily as authority to fund TDY costs and 

to deploy and redeploy personnel and materiel. 

•	 OHDACA and CIF money funded rotary and fixed wing aircraft 

missions to distribute food and water; purchase of construction 

materials and supplies for 67 engineering projects; operation of 

temporary base camps for 5,000 troops; purchase of medical 

supplies; establishment of temporary medical clinics; and resupply of military personnel already in Central America. 

•	 OFDA money funded Phase I flying hours, construction materials 

for roads, bridges, schools, and clinics, and the purchase of two 

commercial bridges for Honduras.165 

OFDA spent one third of its annual budget in the first six weeks of the 

Mitch response. The disaster also required that previously allocated 

OHDACA funds be reallocated, temporarily halting U.S. demining efforts 

throughout the world.166 

In May, 1999, Congress approved an Emergency Supplemental 

Appropriations bill, totaling $956 million in aid for Central America and the 

Caribbean, in response to Hurricanes Mitch and Georges. This bill included 

164 Report to Congress, U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), at 4 (Mar. 29, 1999). 

165 Report to Congress, U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), at 6 (Mar. 29, 1999). 

166 Memorandum, Colonel Gary L. Herrington, US Army Peacekeeping Institute, subject: Trip Report of 

Hurricanes Georges and Mitch After-Action Reviews (AARs) (16 Mar. 1999. 

71 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

$62.3 million to fund Phase III, the Expanded New Horizons program. The 

bill also included $158.6 million to replenish DoD and USAID accounts for 

the emergency phase of the relief effort. 

a. Generic Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Funds 

The “Purpose Statute,” 31 U.S.C § 1301(a), restricts the use of 

appropriated funds. “Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for 

which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by 

law.”167 This provision is not new. In 1898, the Comptroller General 

demonstrated the stringency of the requirement. “It is difficult to see how a 

legislative prohibition could be expressed in stronger terms. The law is 

plain, and any disbursing officer disregards it at his peril.”168 However, 

application of this law to the use of O&M funds in contingency operations, 

particularly in disaster relief operations, is not so clear, even to the most well 

trained JA. 

Application of the Purpose Statute generally prohibits the transfer of 

military goods and services for humanitarian purposes. Several regulatory 

and statutory authorities provide relief from this constraint for disaster 

assistance. There is an immediate response exception for foreign disasters. 

Nothing in this Directive should be construed as preventing a 

military commander at the immediate scene of a foreign 

disaster from undertaking prompt relief operations when time is 

of the essence and when humanitarian considerations make it 

advisable to do so. The commander should report at once the 

action taken and request guidance in accordance with the 

provisions of this Directive.169 

This provision empowers commanders to use O&M funds to respond 

promptly to emergencies involving imminent loss of life before appropriate 

funding (usually OHDACA) becomes available. Commanders are instructed 

to record these expenditures for possible reimbursement. However, 

commanders should realize that reimbursement might not occur, and budget 

167 31 U.S.C. § 1301(a) (Originally enacted Mar. 3, 1809, 2 Stat. 535). 

168 4 Comp. Dec. 569, 570 (1898). 

169 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5100.46, FOREIGN DISASTER RELIEF (4 Dec. 1975) (at Appendix D-24). 

72 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

shortfalls could result. Use of O&M funds for this purpose must stop when 

alternative funding is allocated, or when an operation moves beyond the 

immediate response stage.170 

This authority was used during the first week of November, before 

OSD approved the use of OHDACA funds and before the President 

authorized the response through statutory mechanisms such as the drawdown 

authority, which are discussed below. JTF-BRAVO sought to distribute 

blankets and MREs, valued at over $15,000 to disaster victims. OFDA had 

approved military flight hours, but OFDA personnel were not yet in country 

to approve the distribution of supplies. The SOUTHCOM SJA determined 

that the need “was so imperative,” that the supplies should be distributed.171 

Distribution was appropriate under DoD Directive 5100.46. 

Drawdown and excess property exemptions, when applicable, also 

provide relief from the Purpose Statute constraints. These exemptions are 

discussed in section c. Foreign Disaster Relief Operations Funded From 

Already Paid for Supplies, Equipment and Services, below. 

b. Some of the operations will be funded by a specifically approved 

appropriation. 

(1) Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Aid 

(OHDACA) Funds 

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster and Civic Aid (OHDACA) funds are 

a specific appropriation. OHDACA includes programs under 10 U.S.C. §§ 

401 (limited to demining), 402, 404, 2547, and 2551. Congress appropriates 

approximately $50 million per year to OHDACA. The funds are good for 

two years, and are managed by DSCA. The Assistant Secretary of Defense 

(Special Operations/Low-Intensity Conflict) establishes policy for their use. 

Generally, when OHDACA funds are allocated for a foreign disaster 

assistance mission, they are used for all costs of the mission. 

On November 19, 1998, the Secretary of Defense placed a 

moratorium on the obligation of OHDACA funds, and recalled all 

170 A general “rule of thumb” is that the immediate response stage would not exceed 72 hours. 

171 Memorandum for Record, Captain Daniel P. Saumur, subject: Disaster Relief Funding (2 Nov. 1998) 

(on file with CLAMO). 

73 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

unobligated OHDACA funding from the various CINCs in order to dedicate 

them to the Hurricane Mitch relief effort.172 “Senior DOD Leadership 

understands that this will adversely effect all CINC Humanitarian Assistance 

and Demining programs worldwide.”173 The reservation of OHDACA funds 

for Mitch was essential for filling the funding gap until a supplemental 

appropriation could be made. The funds were later reimbursed. 

(a) Humanitarian and Civic Assistance (HCA) – 10 

U.S.C. § 401 (see Appendix D-9) 

HCA includes: medical, dental, and veterinary care provided in rural 

areas; construction of rudimentary surface transportation systems; well 

drilling and construction of basic sanitation facilities; rudimentary 

construction and repair of public facilities; detection and clearance of 

landmines, including activities relating to the furnishing of education, 

training, and technical assistance with respect to the detection and clearance 

of landmines.174 Although § 401 HCA appears, in appropriations act 

language, to be funded from OHDACA, in practice this account is funded by 

the services with fenced O&M funds.175 Only the de-mining portion of § 

401 is funded by OHDACA. Therefore, HCA generally comes from a “pot 

of money” separate from OHDACA. 

172 Message, 19 Nov. 1998, from Secretary of Defense to USCINEUR, USCINCCENT, USCINCACOM, 

USCINCSO, USCINCPAC, DLA, USCINCSOC, Joint Staff, RUEKJCS/SECDEF, DISAM, SECSTATE 

(19 Nov. 1998). 

173 Message, 19 Nov. 1998, from Secretary of Defense to USCINEUR, USCINCCENT, USCINCACOM, 

USCINCSO, USCINCPAC, DLA, USCINCSOC, Joint Staff, RUEKJCS/SECDEF, DISAM, SECSTATE 

(19 Nov. 1998). 

174 No member of the US armed forces may engage in the physical detection, lifting, or destruction of 

landmines (unless for the purpose of supporting an US military operation). HCA projects must be 

approved by the Secretary of State. The Secretary concerned must determine that the proposed HCA 

activities will promote both the security interests of both the US and the country concerned, and the 

specific operational readiness skills of the members of the US armed forces participating in the activity. 

175 Telephonic interview with Lieutenant Colonel Timothy Pendolino, Office of Legal Counsel to 

Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (Mar. 16, 2000). See § 8009 of the Fiscal year FY) 2000 Department of 

Defense Appropriations Act. 

74 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

(b) Transportation of Humanitarian Relief Supplies 

for NGOs – 10 U.S.C. § 402 (see Appendix D-10) 

This provision is also known as the Denton Amendment. The Denton 

Amendment is discussed in detail in section 4., below. 

(c) Foreign Disaster Assistance – 10 U.S.C. § 404 (see 

Appendix D-11) 

Section 404 permits the President to direct the Secretary of Defense to 

provide disaster assistance outside the U.S. to respond to manmade or 

natural disasters when necessary to prevent loss of life. The President 

delegated to the Secretary of Defense the authority to provide disaster relief 

with the Secretary of State’s concurrence (or in an emergency when there is 

not sufficient time to seek concurrence, provided the Secretary of Defense 

seeks concurrence as soon as practicable thereafter) in Executive Order 

12966 (see Appendix D-6). Assistance provided may include transportation, 

supplies, services, and equipment.

 (d) Excess Nonlethal Supplies for Humanitarian 

Relief – 10 U.S.C. § 2547 (see Appendix D-12) 

This provision permits the Secretary of Defense to make available for 

humanitarian relief purposes any nonlethal excess supplies of DoD. Excess 

supplies must be transferred to the Secretary of State, who is responsible for 

distributing them. “Nonlethal excess supplies” are defined as property, other 

than real property, that is excess property, as defined in regulations, and not 

weapons, ammunition, or other equipment or material designed to inflict 

serious bodily harm or death. 

(e) Humanitarian Assistance – 10 U.S.C. § 2551 (see 

Appendix D-13) 

“To the extent provided in defense authorization acts, funds 

authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for a fiscal year 

for humanitarian assistance shall be used for the purpose of providing 

transportation of humanitarian relief and for other humanitarian purposes 

worldwide.” Humanitarian Assistance under § 2551 is funded by 

OHDACA. 

75 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

How does § 2551 differ from § 401? If the assistance to be provided 

meets all of the requirements of § 401, it is § 401 Humanitarian and Civic 

Assistance, and is funded with HCA funding. If it does not, but is for a 

humanitarian purpose, it is § 2551 Humanitarian Assistance, and is funded 

by OHDACA, unless another special authority, such as drawdown, is 

involved.176 

In Central America, JAs were routinely queried about the propriety of 

OHDACA expenditures. Questions arose about use of these funds for base 

construction projects; morale, welfare and recreation; awards, including 

coins and certificates of achievement; gifts to foreign dignitaries, and; postdisaster transportation of humanitarian assistance supplies provided by nongovernmental organizations. Each proposed use of OHDACA funds had to 

be carefully scrutinized to ensure use for a proper purpose pursuant to 

statutory guidance. 

(2) Commander-in-Chief (CINC) Initiative Funds (CIFs) – 

10 USC § 166a (see Appendix D-8) 

These funds are appropriated annually as part of the O&M 

appropriation, and managed by the CJCS. CJCS personally reviews and 

approves requests for CIFs from the Combatant Commanders.177 One of the 

approved activities is "humanitarian assistance." 

Humanitarian assistance actions compete with other uses, such as 

force training and joint exercises, for limited CIFs. The statute states that 

CJCS should give funding priority to actions which will enhance warfighting 

capabilities, readiness, and sustainability of forces assigned to the CINC, and 

to activities which will reduce threats to, or enhance, U.S. national security. 

CIFs may be available for purchase of medical and construction 

supplies, as well as other humanitarian assistance purposes. However, as a 

matter of policy, CIFs are not used for “normal service operating costs,” 

including “service force participation in contingency operations.”178 This 

176 CONTRACT AND FISCAL LAW DEPARTMENT, THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL’S SCHOOL, CONTRACT 

AND FISCAL LAW DESKBOOK OUTLINE (1999). 

177 See CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTR. 7401.01A, CINC INITIATIVES FUND (30 Jan. 1999). 

178 Email from Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Helm to Major John Miller, subject: JTF Aguila Funding 

(Hurricane Mitch Support) (Jan. 12, 1999) (citing CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTR. 7401.01A, 

CINC INITIATIVES FUND (30 Jan. 1999)). 

76 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

means that CIFs are not appropriately used for incidental mission expenses, 

such as Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) purposes. See section 8.c. 

Use of Funds for MWR Activities below. 

c. Foreign Disaster Relief Operations Funded From Already 

Purchased Supplies, Equipment and Services 

(1) Special Presidential Drawdown Authority – 22 U.S.C. § 

2318(a)(2) (Foreign Assistance Act § 506(a)(2)) (see 

Appendix D-14) 

Commonly referred to as "drawdown" authority, this provision 

permits the President to draw down articles, services, and military education 

and training if the President determines and reports to the Congress that it is 

in the national interest of the United States to do so. The President may 

direct the drawdown for international narcotics control assistance, 

international disaster assistance, or assistance provided under the Migration 

and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962. This authority is limited to $75 

million from the inventory and resources of DoD per fiscal year, plus $75 

million from other agencies/departments. 

When authorized by the President, this provision allows the transfer of 

goods and services from DoD inventories that would otherwise be prohibited 

by the Purpose Statute.179 New procurements are not authorized. This 

authority was used extensively in Central America. Drawdown authority 

may not be used for new purchases. This constraint proved frustrating to 

commanders, who were required to find alternate funding to purchase 

supplies urgently needed for the relief effort, such as gravel and lumber, but 

which they did not have on hand.180 

The President authorized the drawdown of $30 million in DoD articles 

and services to support the relief effort on November 6, 1998. (See 

Appendix D-1). The President authorized the drawdown of an additional 

$45 million on November 14, 1998. (See Appendix D-2) 

179 Such transfers could otherwise be accomplished only through the Foreign Assistance Act or the Arms 

Export Control Act. 

180 Message, 071330Z Nov. 98, from USCINCSO Miami FL to RUEKCJS/SECDEF Washington, D.C., 

subject: Disaster Relief Operations Under Sec 506(a) Authority (7 Nov. 1998) (at Appendix D-3). 

77 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(2) Donation of Excess Non-Lethal Supplies - 10 U.S.C. 

§ 2547. (See Appendix D-12) 

This provision enables the SECDEF to donate any non-lethal excess 

DoD supplies for humanitarian relief purposes. DoD coordinates with the 

U.S. Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance and other elements of the 

Department of State, which are "responsible for the distribution of such 

supplies." This provision is less far-reaching than the drawdown authority 

under 22 U.S.C. § 2318. Section § 2547 requires that items be declared 

excess under applicable regulations. While this authority can be used to 

transfer a variety of items, it requires coordination in advance with the 

Defense Reutilization and Management Office (DRMO) and higher 

headquarters. 

3. The rules change with the phases of the operation. 

Sources of funds changed with the phases of the operation. During 

the first 72 hours of Phase 1, the Emergency Response Phase, units were 

instructed to use their Operations and Maintenance (O&M) funds to pay for 

disaster response and to record the expenditures so that the funds could be 

reimbursed later. SOUTHCOM subsequently received additional funds to 

replenish O&M accounts. During Phase II, the Rehabilitation Phase, 

drawdown authority was used to fund most activities of military units while 

they were in country. OHDACA and CIF covered expenses drawdown 

could not. 

During Phase III, the Restoration Phase, O&M funded the deployment 

and sustainment costs, while Humanitarian and Civic Assistance (HCA) 

funds supported the incremental expenses of engineer and medical projects. 

The seven exercises known as “Expanded New Horizons” completed Phase 

III. The New Horizons program, which operated prior to Hurricane Mitch, 

will continue. Recently approved New Horizons exercises will continue to 

serve as a training program, which provides incidental benefits to the nations 

stricken by Mitch. 

78 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

4. Space Available Transportation of Relief Supplies (Denton Amendment 

Shipments) 

The Denton Amendment (Transportation of Humanitarian Relief 

Supplies for NGOs, 10 U.S.C. § 402) (see Appendix D-18), permits the 

movement of supplies furnished by a nongovernmental source which are 

intended for humanitarian assistance at no charge, on a space available basis. 

The program is jointly administered by USAID, DoS, and DoD. 

DoD does not fund special flights associated with the Denton 

program. The program simply authorizes the shipment of relief supplies on a 

space available basis. Therefore, it is not accurate to refer to the shipments 

as "Denton flights." Flights may not be arranged solely for humanitarian 

purposes. The statute only authorizes humanitarian cargo on flights that are 

already scheduled for military purposes. It may be more accurate to refer to 

"Denton Cargo."181 The Defense Security Cooperation Office (DSCA) 

approves movement of the cargo; TRANSCOM schedules the movement. 

According to Ms. Judy McCallum of DSCA, the Denton Amendment 

program moves 2 million pounds of privately donated cargo by air each 

year, on average. For the disaster relief operations related to Hurricane 

Mitch recovery, the Denton program moved about 18 million pounds of 

cargo in 2 months -11 million pounds of cargo by air and 7 million pounds 

by surface transportation.182 

While it is illegal to create a “Denton Flight” to haul cargo, some 

Reserve and National Guard units used their previously scheduled flight 

training hours to fly to Central America and back. These training flights 

were generally empty, and often moved Denton cargo. For example, 16 Air 

Force Reserve units and nine Air National Guard units used training hours to 

fly to and from the area. They moved 748 tons of Denton cargo in the 

183 process. 

181 Ms. Judith McCallum, Humanitarian Assistance Officer, Defense Security Cooperation Agency, 

Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 

1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

182 Ms. Judith McCallum, Humanitarian Assistance Officer, Defense Security Cooperation Agency, 

Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 

1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). Transcript at 88. 

183 Lieutenant Colonel Terrie Gent, U.S. Air Force, at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

79 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

DoD and other federal and international agencies found themselves 

stymied by an influx of donations. The International Federation of the Red 

Cross addressed the issue in its second situation report. “Internationally, the 

massive mobilization of assistance is proving difficult to channel. 

Spontaneous initiatives are bypassing coordination systems, and creating a 

major relief management challenge. Outside specialists who are being 

rushed to the area and VIP visits are tying up urgently needed resources.”184 

A USAID fact sheet also commented on the problem. “Unsolicited 

commodity donations often place an unnecessary burden on relief workers 

and local governments to store, transport and distribute supplies to those 

affected populations in need. This can also detract from the provision of 

more urgently needed relief assistance. USAID/OFDA can not provide 

assistance for the transport of donated goods.”185 

Judge advocates need to know what the Denton Amendment program 

authorizes. Once the cargo arrives, the U.S. Government may not pay 

storage and local transportation costs under the Denton program. During 

Hurricane Mitch, units moved supplies under the drawdown authority, which 

permitted donation of services and transportation for humanitarian purposes, 

and with OHDACA funds, under 10 U.S.C. § 2551, which allows for 

military transportation of humanitarian relief items. These authorities made 

some military transport of relief cargo on the receiving end permissible. In 

operations for which humanitarian assistance authorities have not been 

invoked, movement might not be permissible.186 However, JAs must 

understand the rules and be able to articulate a legal basis for movement of 

Denton Cargo. 

One interesting issue raised by transport of Denton Cargo is landing 

fees and taxes. Most SOFAs exempt the U.S. from such fees and taxes. 

NGOs may or may not have the same right to import cargo on a duty-free 

CLAMO) (citing Patrick E. Murray, Headquarters Twelfth Air Force Historical Study, Hurricane Mitch 

and the US Air Force Participation in the Disaster Response, June (1999)). Transcript at 59. 

184 See International Federation of the red Cross (IFRC), Central America: Hurricane Mitch Situation 

Report No. 2 (Nov. 1998) (at Appendix D-20). 

185 See U.S. Agency for International Development, Central America – Hurricane Mitch Fact Sheets #4, 

11, and 22 (at Appendices D-21, D-22 and D-23, respectively). 

186 In some non-humanitarian operations, movement of goods has been justified based on operational 

necessity, when the presence of excess relief supplies interferes with conduct of the military mission. 

80 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

basis. Landing Denton Cargo may trigger import inspection issues. 

Inspections and taxes, if any, are the responsibility of the donor. 

DoS/OFDA should advise us on these issues. See Appendix D-18 for 

additional guidance on Denton Cargo shipments.187 

5. Use of Cash for Local Purchasing 

Paying agents assigned to the JTF contracting section used cash to 

make local purchases throughout the JOA. This was a result of operating in 

areas where merchants were unable or unwilling to accept the IMPAC credit 

card or other forms of payment such as U.S. Treasury checks. Paying agents 

were often required to carry large sums of cash because of the distance 

between merchants and high volume of purchases. This practice resulted in 

the loss, through theft by a foreign national, of over U.S. $10,000.00 on one 

occasion. 

Persons carrying Government funds are strictly liable for most losses 

of such funds. The practice of carrying large sums of cash in foreign 

countries, especially those where crime is commonplace, places soldiers at 

risk of both physical danger and pecuniary liability. 

The use of cash as a method of payment should be avoided whenever 

possible. Contracting personnel should make a concerted effort to 

encourage acceptance of the IMPAC credit card by local merchants. In 

cases where cash must be used, the paying agent should carry only the 

smallest sum possible to achieve the purchase. Moreover, paying agents 

carrying cash must be provided both training about the criminal threat in the 

area and appropriate security. 

6. Unauthorized Commitments 

The first people on site during a deployment want to buy whatever is 

needed to get the job done. Well-meaning soldiers, acting in good faith, 

create unauthorized commitments on each deployment; the Hurricane Mitch 

relief effort followed this pattern. In one instance, soldiers acting without 

legal advice entered into contracts for support and sent the bill to the 

187 See U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID Fact Sheet - The Denton Program, (at 

Appendix D-18). 

81 
 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Embassy without proper authority.188 Once created, unauthorized 

commitments are time consuming and difficult to rectify. Although those 

responsible should have been aware of the requirements, the JA must expect 

this to occur, must be proactive in trying to prevent occurrence, and must 

train unit leaders before they deploy. 

One way to minimize the number of unauthorized commitments is to 

ensure an ordering officer, with proper contracting officer oversight, is 

designated prior to deployment. It is important to develop a relationship 

with contracting personnel very quickly, and to facilitate their interaction 

with unit ordering officers. 

Contracting officers did not deploy early enough in the Hurricane 

Mitch relief effort.189 Units were also unable to successfully utilize 

contracting support from home station.190 These difficulties “slowed initial 

humanitarian assistance efforts.”191 Judge advocates should encourage 

operations officers and commanders to include contracting officers and 

authorized ordering agents in the first movements of personnel into the 

theater. 

It is also important to teach soldiers that they may be held personally 

liable for unauthorized commitments. A few basic guidelines should be 

included in soldiers’ pre-deployment training. While this training may not 

be a traditional JA function, exercising foresight in this area will save the JA 

difficulties later. 

188 Captain Scott D. Walters, TF Nicaragua JA, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). 

189 Captain Leonel Nascimento (Military Analyst, U.S. Army Center for Lessons Learned, CALL), Army 

Lessons Learned and Successful TTPs for Hurricane Mitch Humanitarian Assistance: JTF Commander’s 

Initial Impressions (1999). 

190 Captain Leonel Nascimento (Military Analyst, U.S. Army Center for Lessons Learned, CALL), Army 

Lessons Learned and Successful TTPs for Hurricane Mitch Humanitarian Assistance: JTF Commander’s 

Initial Impressions (1999). 

191 Captain Leonel Nascimento (Military Analyst, U.S. Army Center for Lessons Learned, CALL), Army 

Lessons Learned and Successful TTPs for Hurricane Mitch Humanitarian Assistance: JTF Commander’s 

Initial Impressions (1999). 

82 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

7. Contracting Issues.
 

 “FUERTE APOYO” 

JTF AGUILA CONTRACT PROCESSING 

REQUESTING 

UNIT 

INITIATES 3953 

W/ REQMT & 

COST ESTIMATE 

J4 

VALIDATES NORMAL 

SUPPLY CHANNELS CAN’T 

FILL & CONSOLIDATES 

REQMTS 

J3 

VALIDATES RQMT; 

ENSURES PRIORITIES 

ARE MAINTAINED 

J-8 

APPLIES FUND 

CITE AND TRACKS 

COMMITMENTS 

JTF-SJA LEGAL 

REVIEW 

USARSO 

SJA 

JTF 

CONTRACTING 

OBLIGATES 

FUNDS 

VENDOR 

CRP 

a. The Contracting Process. 

JTF-Aquila found the government contacting process difficult to 

execute in Central America. The commander appointed a J-8 to process the 

multiple funding streams provided to the JTF. Geographic separation of 

units made necessary the development of a standard, well understood 

contracting process. This process proved effective in standardizing and 

maintaining oversight over a large number of contracting actions. The JTFA process is depicted in Figure D-2, below. 

Figure D-2, The JTF-Aquila Contracting Process. 

b. Use of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold 

Judge advocates should be aware of simplified acquisition procedures. 

Simplified acquisition procedures streamline the contracting process. While 

still requiring promotion of competition to the maximum extent practicable,

83 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

they can reduce administrative costs, increase opportunities for small 

business concerns, and promote efficiency and economy in contracting. 

Simplified acquisition procedures are detailed in Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (FAR) part 13, and include such methods as use of the 

government purchase card, purchase orders, blanket purchase agreements, 

and imprest funds. These methods can be used to make purchases not 

exceeding (1) the simplified acquisition threshold, which currently is 

$100,000; (2) $200,000 during designated contingency operations;192 and (3) 

$5,000,000, when purchasing commercial items as defined in FAR 2.101, 

subject to any specific limitation applicable to the particular procedure.193 

The $5,000,000 threshold is authorized only under the Commercial 

Item Test Program, which is currently scheduled to expire on January 1, 

2002.194 Contracting activities are to use simplified acquisition procedures 

under the pilot program to the maximum extent practicable.195 

8. Use of Funds for Gifts, Awards, and MWR Activities. 

a. Purchase of Awards and Gifts for JTF Personnel 

Commanders often want to recognize and reward soldiers for a job 

done well under adverse conditions. Fiscal laws and regulations permit the 

use of some types of funds for this purpose. JAs must be familiar with these 

funding sources and the regulations governing them. 

During the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, recognition proposals 

included purchasing coins, designing and producing miniature JTF colors, 

producing certificates of appreciation, and giving knives as "safety awards." 

192 The increase was approved for Hurricane Mitch relief efforts in December 1998. Memorandum from 

Acting Director, Procurement and Industrial Base Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army, 

Research, Development, and Acquisition (1Dec.1998). 

193 See 10 U.S.C. § 2304(g)(1)(B); FAR 13.5. The broad definition of commercial items includes, among 

other things, items sold, leased, or licensed to the general public, or has been offered for sale, lease, or 

license to the general public. 

194 See National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 § 806(b). 

195 See American Eurocopter Corporation, B-283700, Dec. 16, 1999, 1999 U.S. Comp. Gen. Lexis 222 

(upholding purchase of a Bell Helicopter using the FAR 13.5 authority). 

84 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Processing the requests to use funding for coins, for example, took weeks.196 

The difficult issue was the type of funding the JTF could use for this 

purpose. 

Gifts for soldiers or commanders may not be purchased with 

appropriated funds. AR 600-8-22 governs the presentation of certificates, 

trophies, and similar devices awarded in recognition of achievement. 

Relevant portions are included at Appendix D-17. MACOMs and CINCs 

may have special rules governing the use of O&M funds for awards and 

coins. Deploying JAs should familiarize themselves with the statutes, 

regulations and local command policies relating to the local purchase of 

awards. 

Generally, unit coins and certificates can be purchased with O&M 

funds, and awarded for unique contributions to the mission. The key to this 

question is that the item must truly be given as an award. Coins may not be 

given universally to all unit soldiers. They must be awarded based on a 

unique contribution to the mission. Units and MACOMs sometimes issue 

coin policies. These policies should be consulted prior to the purchase of 

coins. 

Contingency missions create special issues. During the Hurricane 

Mitch relief effort, the question arose whether awards could be purchased 

with OHDACA money. Purchase of awards with CIFs was determined to be 

impermissible because CIFs may not be used for normal operating costs.197 

Higher headquarters should always be consulted on the issue of spending 

special funding to purchase awards. 

b. Purchase of Awards and Gifts for Foreign Dignitaries 

On most contingency operations, commanders are expected to interact 

with foreign dignitaries. It is customary to exchange mementos or small 

gifts on such occasions. There were several proposals to purchase awards, 

196 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). Transcript at 143. 

197 Email from Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Helm to Major John Miller, subject: JTF Aguila Funding 

(Hurricane Mitch Support) (Jan. 12, 1999) (citing CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTR. 7401.01A, 

CINC INITIATIVES FUND (30 Jan. 1999)). 

85 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

gifts and mementos with appropriated funds for foreign dignitaries during 

the deployment. 

Such gifts may not be purchased with either general O&M funds or 

OHDACA funds. Initially, the JTF did not have the proper type of funds for 

the purchase of gifts and mementos for foreign dignitaries. Therefore, the 

JTF Commander requested Official Representation Funds (ORFs) from 

SOUTHCOM for that purpose. 

AR 37-47 governs the use of ORFs. Relevant portions are included at 

Appendix D-16. Official Representation Funds may be used to extend 

official courtesies to authorized guests. These may include meals or gifts to 

foreign dignitaries. CJCSI 7201.01, Combatant Commanders’ Official 

Representation Funds, governs the use of ORFs at the Combatant 

Commander level. 

c. Use of Funds for MWR Activities 

Appropriated funds are used for MWR activities in a deployed 

setting.198 However, in the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, a variety of funds 

were available, and choosing the appropriate funding became an issue. CIFs 

were available for humanitarian assistance, but CIFs may not be used for 

normal operating costs.199 

In Comalapa, El Salvadore, soldiers who had been restricted to base 

for between 30 and 45 days were taken by bus to the local market or to 

cultural sites on day trips. Initially, the U.S. Embassy paid for the bus trips. 

The commander sought guidance on which, if any, available funding could 

be used for similar MWR activities. The soldiers comprising TF El 

198 “MWR support is mission funded during war and other conditions covered in this section. MWR 

activities are necessary to maintain physical fitness and to alleviate combat stress by temporarily diverting 

soldiers’ focus from combat situations.” U.S. DEP’T OF THE ARMY, REG. 215-1, MORALE, WELFARE, AND 

RECREATION ACTIVITIES, AND NONAPPROPRIATED FUND INSTRUMENTALITIES, Section IV, Mobilization, 

Contingency and Wartime Operations, Para. 8-26 (25 Oct. 1998). See also U.S. DEP’T OF THE ARMY, REG. 

215-1, MORALE, WELFARE, AND RECREATION ACTIVITIES, AND NONAPPROPRIATED FUND 

INSTRUMENTALITIES, Section IV, Mobilization, Contingency and Wartime Operations, Para. 8-31 (“In 

theater MWR. All categories of MWR activities shall be mission funded with APFs per FM 12–6 (chap 

7)”). 

199 Email from Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Helm to Major John Miller, subject: JTF Aguila Funding 

(Hurricane Mitch Support) (Jan. 12, 1999) (citing CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTR. 7401.01A, 

CINC INITIATIVES FUND (30 Jan. 1999)). 

86 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Salvadore came from 10 or more units. While the sending headquarters of 

the units had O&M funds, the TF did not. Some sending units did not 

believe it was appropriate to spend their O&M funds for the Hurricane 

Mitch relief effort. As a result, the deployed units did not have access to 

O&M funds. 

The question arose whether OHDACA funds could be used for MWR 

activities, within reason, where the commander determines that MWR was a 

necessary expense of an extended humanitarian mission. Use of OHDACA 

funds for reasonable MWR activities was determined to be permissible in 

this case.200 Judge advocates should expect this issue to arise, and should 

always raise it to higher headquarters for review. 

9. Requests for Support to Non-DoD Organizations 

The Hurricane Mitch relief effort was based on a Presidential directive to 

conduct foreign disaster relief. DoD Directive 5100.46 defines foreign 

disaster relief as “[p]rompt aid which can be used to alleviate the suffering 

of foreign disaster victims.” This normally includes “humanitarian services 

and transportation; the provision of food, clothing, medicines, beds and 

bedding, temporary shelter and housing; the furnishing of medical materiel, 

medical and technical personnel; and making repairs to essential 

services.”201 

Judge Advocates supporting the relief effort used this definition as a 

guide to the acceptable parameters for the use of OHDACA and other 

disaster relief funding. As basic needs were addressed and the immediate 

life-threatening conditions subsided, JAs reviewed numerous requests for 

support that were outside the scope of the mission and available funding. 

Some of these issues are addressed below. 

200 Email from Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Helm to Major John Miller, subject: JTF Aguila Funding 

(Hurricane Mitch Support) (Jan. 12, 1999) (citing CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTR. 7401.01A, 

CINC INITIATIVES FUND (30 Jan. 1999)). 

201 U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE DIRECTIVE 5100.46, FOREIGN DISASTER RELIEF (4 Dec. 1995). 

87 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

a. Support to Non-Governmental Organizations 

(1) Movement of Supplies 

The Denton Amendment, discussed above, governed no-cost military 

movement of NGO-provided relief supplies into the theater. Denton 

movements were scheduled by TRANSCOM for the Army. However, the 

Denton Amendment does not authorize the transportation of supplies once 

they reach the final military port. Further movement of these supplies by the 

military is generally considered humanitarian assistance, and may be 

prohibited in missions where humanitarian assistance funding is not 

available. During the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, drawdown authority and 

OHDACA funds were available, and the provision of humanitarian 

assistance was authorized. As a result, it was permissible for the military to 

schedule transport flights within the host nation to move the supplies in 

cooperation with the NGOs. 

(2) Transport of Aid Workers 

During the early stages of the operation, NGO personnel sometimes 

requested military transport along with supplies to ensure accountability. 

The use of military transportation by civilians is governed by a variety of 

DoD, Army, and command-specific regulations.202 These regulations 

continue to apply in humanitarian assistance missions. During some 

missions, the Deputy Secretary of Defense has issued blanket approval for 

particular categories of civilians to use military transport. This issue should 

be anticipated, and closely coordinated with higher headquarters. 

In some instances, the Joint Travel Regulation (JTR) authorizes 

issuance of invitational travel orders (ITOs) to individuals not employed by 

the U.S. Government.203 Commanders and staffs must closely review each 

request to determine whether transport of non-DoD civilians is appropriate 

under Chapter 6 of the JTR. Generally, ITOs may only be issued where the 

recipient is providing a direct benefit to the U.S. military. 

202 See U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE DIR. 4500.56, DOD POLICY ON THE USE OF GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT AND 

AIR TRAVEL (2 Mar. 1997); U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE DIR. 4515.13-R, AIR TRANSPORTATION ELIGIBILITY 

(Nov. 1994); U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE DIR. 4500.9, TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (Jan. 

1989); and DEP’T OF THE ARMY REG. 95-1, FLIGHT REGULATIONS (1 Sep.1997). 

203 JOINT TRAVEL REGULATION, Chapter 6. (See Appendix D-15 for an extract.) 

88 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

b. Support to Host Nation Military 

JTF Commanders received numerous requests for support from host 

nation military members. Requests for support ranged from provision of 

fuel and meals to construction of facilities. 

(1) Construction and Improvements for Host Nation 

Military 

In some instances, host nation military commanders requested base 

improvement projects inconsistent with the JTF humanitarian/disaster relief 

mission and associated funding. Throughout the JOA, U.S. forces were 

housed on host nation military reservations. In each country, with the 

exception of Guatemala, the diplomatic notes negotiated prior to the JTF’s 

arrival called upon the host nations to provide such support to U.S. forces as 

part of their contribution to the hurricane relief effort. 

Notwithstanding such commitments by their governments, some local 

base commanders sought U.S. assistance in improving their bases with 

minor construction projects. U.S. commanders sometimes felt pressured to 

support these local commanders. In other instances, commanders wanted to 

provide support in the spirit of good will and cooperation. 

In El Salvador, one proposal called for a written agreement, which 

would have committed the U.S. to certain base improvement projects in 

return for base support. The JA advised against it because it was contrary to 

the exchange of Diplomatic Notes, and the commander did not enter into the 

agreement. 

In the spirit of cooperation, U.S. commanders sometimes made 

unsolicited offers of such assistance. However, fiscal constraints prevented 

commanders from fulfilling many of these “promises.” O&M, OHDACA, 

and other available funding were designated for emergency humanitarian 

assistance. These funds could not be used to improve host nation military 

facilities.204 Promises made by U.S. military members are often considered 

promises of the U.S. Government by local nationals. Well meaning offers 

204 Such work might have been possible if an ACSA or other international agreement was in place, 

authorizing payment or reimbursement in kind. 

89 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

by U.S. commanders to “help” had the potential for complicating relations 

between host nation base commanders and U.S. commanders. 

Commanders sometimes sought to make improvements to buildings 

occupied by U.S. military forces. Such projects must facilitate Task Force 

operational requirements. Commanders may authorize maintenance and 

repair projects designed to facilitate U.S. humanitarian and/or disaster relief 

operations or designed to mitigate damage to existing base facilities 

resulting from U.S. operations. 

An incidental long-term benefit to the host nation military does not 

preclude approval of such projects. However, benefit to the host nation, 

alone, does not constitute a proper purpose. All projects must be mission 

related and necessary and proper for operational needs. 

Humanitarian and disaster relief missions are separate and distinct 

from security and foreign assistance missions. As a result, commanders 

were advised not to perform projects solely for the benefit of the host nation 

military. 

(2) Requests From Host Nation Military For Personal or 

Logistical Support 

One TF received a request from a host nation LNO for meals and 

fuel.205 The JA advised that neither meals nor fuel might be provided to 

foreign military officers using mission funds absent an agreement for 

reimbursement. On a non-recurring basis, it might be possible to provide 

meals using ORFs, if the circumstances met the requirements of AR 37-47. 

Daily meals for an LNO would not meet those requirements. 

c. Access to Post Exchange (PX) facilities 

Post Exchange/ Base Exchange (PX/BX) access has been an issue on 

every recent deployment.206 During the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, 

members of the Media requested PX access, because commercial retail 

205 Email message from Captain Daniel P. Saumur, to Lieutenant ColonelAntonio Mendibur, U.S. Air 

Force, (Oct. 27, 1998) (on file with CLAMO). 

206 See CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS, LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN THE BALKANS, 

1995-1998: LESSONS LEARNED FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES (13 Nov. 1998). 

90 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

outlets in Central America immediately following the hurricane were 

limited. 

ARs 60-10 and 60-20 govern access to PX facilities. These 

regulations outline a process for obtaining special permission to extend PX 

privileges to those not normally entitled. In Bosnia, special permission was 

granted for Americans serving under the Dayton Peace Accord with the UN 

International Police Task Force (IPTF) to use the PX facilities. Non-U.S. 

IPTF members were not granted access. 

Use of the PX by non-military personnel generally creates SOFA 

issues, as well. Most SOFAs grant duty-free status to PX imports, and 

prohibit transfer of these duty-free goods to non-military personnel. 

During Hurricane Mitch, the SOFA with Honduras was interpreted to 

prohibit transfer of duty-free items to anyone other than military and 

civilians in direct support of the force.207 A request for special permission 

for PX accesses by the media was not sought due to SOFA and policy 

concerns. 

10. Support to Host Nation Populace 

a. Donation of Food 

JTF Aquila generated several requests to donate excess Class I (food) 

to host nation citizens affected by the hurricane. During Phase I, U.S. forces 

donated MREs to hungry civilians. This was part of the immediate response 

to save lives, and was justified based on the declared emergency and the 10 

U.S.C. § 2551 authority to conduct the humanitarian assistance mission. 

As the operation moved into Phase II, a policy determination was 

made not to use OHDACA funds to provide food to host nation civilians. A 

sufficient number of NGOs were operating for this purpose, and provision of 

food no longer fit the U.S. Forces’ mission of rehabilitation. 

207 Email message from Captain Daniel Samur to Captain Charles Jacoby and Lieutenant Colonel Antonio 

Mendibur (Nov. 9, 1998) (on file with CLAMO); Email message from Lieutenant ColonelAntonio 

Mendibur to Captain Charles Jacoby and Captain Daniel Saumur (Nov. 9, 1998) (on file with CLAMO). 

91 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

The issue of donating “excess” or “unusable” food still arose. The 

JTF legal advisor determined that during the second phase of the operation 

OHDACA funds should not be used during the later phases for the specific 

purpose of providing food to the host nation.208 However, the donation of 

“remnants,” or food that would otherwise be unused, was approved. Such 

donations must not be excessive, and must be designed to avoid passing 

illness to the recipients or generating liability for the U.S. 

Donation of unusable food within the U.S. is governed by 10 U.S.C. § 

2485. While not applicable overseas, the statute offers a valuable analytical 

framework to help minimize liability and abuse. This statute provides that 

donatable food must meet the following criteria: 

(1) food must be certified as edible by appropriate food 

inspection technicians; 

(2)	 food would otherwise be destroyed as unusable; and 

(3) in the case of commissary store food, food must be 

unmarketable and unsaleable.209 

b. Medical Services 

“U.S. Doctors, Dentists, Nurses, and Medics performed basic health 

checkups and immunizations, as well as diagnosed and treated patients for 

diarrhea, respiratory infections, parasitic infestation, not to mention pulling a 

lot of teeth.”210 Donation of medical and optometry services and supplies, 

including eyeglasses, was determined to be consistent with the mission, and 

appropriate with available funding. OHDACA and CIF funding may be 

used for this purpose. 

208 This was a policy determination based on the scope of the second phase of the mission. Where there is a 

humanitarian need for food, it is legally permissible to use OHDACA funds and drawdown authority for 

the provision of food. 

209 10 U.S.C. § 2485. This statute limits recipients of donated food to designated organizations. This 

statute is NOT applicable to overseas missions, but provides a useful framework for reviewing requests for 

donated “excess” food. 

210 Captain Timothy M. Gilhool, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History of Joint 

Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999, at 18 (Feb. 

1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

92 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

During the first Phase of the operation, treatment of sustained injuries 

and control of communicable disease in unsanitary conditions was of 

paramount concern. The provision of medical care was a necessary part of 

the immediate mission to save lives. Veterinarians also treated pets and 

livestock. “It was the Army Nurses, Air Force Doctors, and the Navy 

Corpsmen who, more than any other element of the JTF, were seen by the 

average Central American. It was these service members who represented 

America’s physical commitment to helping out after Hurricane Mitch.”211 

United States forces’ provision of medical services was possible due to 

the nature of the mission and the availability of OHDACA funding. 

Extensive provision of medical assistance to the general population would 

not be possible in contingencies where humanitarian assistance funding is 

unavailable. 

11. Fiscal Issues of Other Agencies 

a. USAID/OFDA 

United States Military officers often do not understand OFDA’s 

mission.212 OFDA leads the foreign disaster response for USAID, providing 

funding and oversight for U.S. foreign disaster assistance. According to Mr. 

Peter Smith of OFDA, they do not operate at the “retail level.”213 OFDA 

gives 70% of its budget each year to NGOs in the form of grants. OFDA 

works with NGOs on proposals to address identified needs, and then 

provides funding for the NGO to carry out the agreed upon work. OFDA 

also coordinates funding for NGOs from other donors. 

OFDA also provides funding to the ICRC. The International 

Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) does not receive grants to perform 

211 Captain Timothy M. Gilhool, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History of Joint 

Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999, at 19 (Feb. 

1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

212 The Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, About OFDA (visited Apr. 13, 2000) 

<http://www.info.usaid.gov/hum_response/ofda/>. 

213 Mr. Peter D. R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office 

of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

Transcript at 102. 

93 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

specified work. Instead, OFDA gives money based on an international 

ICRC appeal for funds. ICRC then uses the funds for general operations. 

OFDA also works with the UNHCR and other UN agencies. OFDA 

sometimes provides supplies or other support to UN agencies, but funding 

UN agencies is a State Department responsibility. OFDA interaction with 

UN agencies is primarily a coordination effort. 

OFDA maintains forward deployed field offices, with regional 

disaster management specialists, who respond to disasters in their area. 

OFDA also sends Disaster Assistance Response Teams (DARTs) to advise 

the local ambassador. OFDA seeks military transport only when 

commercial transport is not available, or when military political conditions 

make use of military aircraft preferable. Military transport is usually on a 

reimbursable basis. The UN’s Office for the Coordinator of Humanitarian 

Affairs (OCHA) provides some transport and survey capability for OFDA, 

often at a lower cost than military transport. 

During the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, the U.S. Military worked 

cooperatively with OFDA in six major ways: 

•	 OFDA funded some U.S. Military flights; 

•	 OFDA used Soto Cano Airbase as its relief operations hub; 

•	 OFDA funded some U.S. military construction and engineering 

activities; 

•	 OFDA drew supplies for distribution from its Panama stockpile; 

•	 OFDA worked cooperatively on Denton/funded relief transport, 

and; 

•	 OFDA conducted coordination and liaison activities.214 

Transfer of OFDA funding to the U.S. Military was both immediate 

and significant. Prior to anticipated landfall in Belize, OFDA prepositioned funds with SOUTHCOM. OFDA authorized up to $250,000 for 

search and rescue and emergency evacuation (transport of supplies was not 

required). During initial landfall in Honduras, OFDA positioned $750,000 

for rotary and fixed wing operations (including positioning and support 

214 Mr. Peter D. R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office 

of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

94 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

costs), aerial assessment, search and rescue, emergency evacuation, and 

transport of supplies.215 

Working cooperatively with OFDA also gave the U.S. Military 

greater flexibility. For example, drawdown authority is limited to the use of 

existing stocks. New purchases are not permitted. Unfortunately, the 

military did not have all of the items it needed to carry out the relief mission 

on hand. The military was able to use OFDA funding to purchase new 

equipment and supplies, such as sand, gravel, and lumber, to further the 

relief effort.216 The flexibility gained by “partnering with OFDA” “allowed 

DoD and the USG [U.S. Government] to make a significant contribution to 

the relief efforts.”217 

b. CARE 

Well-established NGOs may have access to, and knowledge of, the 

disaster site that the military lacks. CARE is one such organization. CARE 

has an international budget of a half-billion dollars per year, focused almost 

exclusively on development and emergencies in underdeveloped countries. 

“If a country gets too developed, we move out.”218 CARE initiated 

programs in Central America in the 1950s and 1960s. These programs had 

significant ties to the area when the hurricane hit. Well-established NGOs 

may have existing country agreements, which offer them protections and 

immunities similar to SOFAs.219 

215 Mr. Peter D. R. Smith, Logistics Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Office 

of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane 

Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

216 Message, 071330Z Nov. 98, from USCINCSO Miami FL to RUEKCJS/SECDEF Washington, D.C., 

subject: Disaster Relief Operations Under Sec 506(a) Authority (7 Nov. 1998) (at Appendix D-3). 

217 Message, 071330Z Nov. 98, from USCINCSO Miami FL to RUEKCJS/SECDEF Washington, D.C., 

subject: Disaster Relief Operations Under Sec 506(a) Authority (7 Nov. 1998) (at Appendix D-3). 

218 Mr. Yan Schollaert, Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). Transcript at 121. 

219 Mr. Yan Schollaert, Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). Transcript at 125. CARE Nicaragua has international organization status in Nicaragua, which 

gives them semi-diplomatic status. NGOs may also serve under UN contract, and carry UN protections and 

immunities. 

95 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

When Mitch made landfall, CARE was hard at work evacuating 

people and organizing its relief effort. Mr. Yan Schollaert, Director of 

CARE Nicaragua, stated that CARE had a budget of $350,000 the day after 

Mitch made landfall, and had assisted 45,000 people within 5 days.220 

Because they had established programs, and operate under different 

mandates and constraints, NGOs can affect the disaster site in ways the 

military cannot. For example, CARE established Food-for-Work and Cashfor-Work programs during the relief effort. Some of the Cash-for-Work 

funding came from USAID. They were able to employ approximately 8,000 

people in the rehabilitation effort. Their first priority was saving lives, 

followed by health and sanitation, and then infrastructure and agricultural 

rehabilitation. 

CARE encourages community involvement in their work projects. 

During the rehabilitation phase, CARE built or rebuilt 300 water systems 

with the help of the local communities. CARE contributed materials; the 

community provided 20% of the material and the labor.221 CARE helped 

organize road clearing and sanitation teams, and provided tools. Cash-forWork teams made important contributions to road rehabilitation programs.222 

“During the project's first phase, one or more members of more than 2,100 

households in 60 communities rebuilt 101 kilometers of road, cleared 

riverbeds of flood debris, and built retention walls and sewers.”223 

220 Mr. Yan Schollaert, Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). Transcript at 114. 

221 Mr. Yan Schollaert, Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s 

Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with 

CLAMO). Transcript at 116. 

222 CARE, CARE’s Post-Hurricane Mitch Response in Central America, A Progress Report, November 

1998 Through January 1999 (found in CARE, CARE Nicaragua, An Overview (Mar. 1999)). 

223 CARE, CARE’s response in Nicaragua <http://www.care.org/publications/mitch/nicaragua.htm>. 

96 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

E. FORCE PROTECTION 

1. Force protection is always an issue. 

Force protection will be a priority in every mission. Force protection 

goals must be defined up front to be successful. Situational awareness and 

timely, accurate cultural intelligence will assist in identifying the threats. 

Once the threats are identified, control measures must be established to 

minimize risk. A Force Protection Working Group (FPWG) should be 

established to assist the commander in continuously assessing the threats and 

recommending countermeasures. 

Although the purpose of this mission was to provide humanitarian 

assistance, much of the AOR in which U.S. forces operated had an 

extremely high crime rate. The ability to exercise self-defense was of 

paramount importance. Portions of Central America (particularly 

Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala) have experienced long periods of 

insurgency, which increased tensions and uncertainty. In Nicaragua, there 

was still an undercurrent of anti-U.S. sentiment resulting from U.S. support 

to the Contras in their fight against the Sandinista regime. Many of our base 

camps were located in “Sandinista Country” which increased the possibility 

of confrontation. Several relief projects throughout the AOR were canceled 

because the criminal or terrorist threat was assessed as too high. 

JTF-Aguila Policy Letter #4, Force Protection, established the force 

protection policy for the JTF224. This memorandum stated, “Force 

Protection remains the number one priority of JTF-Aguila. Nothing we do is 

worth serious injury or the loss of life.” Force Protection measures 

implemented in this policy letter included the use of minimum Force 

Protection Posture (FPP) levels, corresponding threat condition 

(THREATCON) measures, and periodic force protection inspections. 

Enclosures to the memo describe the minimum measures to be implemented 

for each FPP level, the measures corresponding to THREATCON level 

Alpha+, and the force protection inspection checklist. Country Task Force 

Commanders were tasked with assessing the threat to U.S. forces in their 

operational area, implementing the appropriate FPP, and conducting periodic 

inspections of their Force Protection program. JTF-Aguila established a 

224 Memorandum, Headquarters, Joint Task Force Aguila, JTFA-C, to Distribution A, subject: Policy Letter 

#4, Force Protection (3 Jan. 1999) (at Appendix E-1). 

97 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Force Protection Working Group (FPWG) to oversee the JTF Commander’s 

Force Protection Program. The FPWG met weekly and consisted of 

commanders, staff, and special staff, as well as, Host Nation police and 

military forces. At a minimum, the FPWG should consist of the S-2 

(Intelligence Officer), S-3 (Operations Officer), S-5 (Civil- Military 

Operations Officer), JA, Military Police representative, and 

counterintelligence representative. 

Within the JTF, convoys were limited to a minimum of two vehicles. 

Except for a few individuals who received waivers to travel restrictions, 

armed host nation military personnel accompanied all JTF movement 

outside compounds. See Appendix E-5: JTF Aguila Policy Letter #4 – 

Vehicle Movement Outside the Designated Compound of Comalapa Air 

Base, El Salvador. Charlie Company, 1/502d Infantry, 101st Airborne 

Division (AAslt) deployed with the JTF and dispersed its soldiers 

throughout the AOR to act as quick reaction forces. The JTF Commander 

placed dangerous areas off limits. See Appendix E4: JTF Aguila 

Memorandum, Subject: Off Limits Areas on Comalapa Air Base. 

Commanders also found that educating JTF members on the history of the 

region (civil wars, insurgencies, past U.S. involvement) made the Force 

Protection Program easier to understand and better received by JTF 

members. 

An additional concern in the Force Protection area is Status of Forces 

Agreements (SOFAs). See Section C. International Law for a detailed 

discussion of SOFA issues. Generally, our Status of Forces Agreements 

(SOFAs) with host nations include provisions which permit U.S. soldiers to 

carry weapons for their own protection. Based on concerns by the 

Nicaraguan government, that provision was deleted from the Nicaragua 

SOFA. Soldiers were allowed to carry weapons since this was not 

prohibited, but they did so discretely. For example, claims officers carried 

9mm pistols instead of having clearly visible weapons mounted on top of 

High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs). 

2. Service members must be trained on the Rules of Engagement (ROE) – 

preferably before arriving in the AOR. 

Even though Fuerte Apoyo was a disaster relief operation, ROE were 

still required. U.S. Forces must always have the right to use force in self98 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

defense, regardless of the nature of the mission. The JTF Aguila Force 

Protection Program was crafted based on the ROE in effect for the operation. 

All service members should have a solid grounding in basic JCS 

SROE principles before they deploy. Once the mission is assigned, and 

before deployment to the AOR, training must commence on the missionspecific ROE. JAs will be involved in developing and disseminating ROE. 

Early coordination with Higher Headquarters JAs is critical. For Hurricane 

Mitch operations, the U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) Standing 

ROE for Deployed Forces applied. See Appendix E-3: U.S. SOUTHCOM 

Standing ROE for Deployed Forces. Service members who had a basic 

understanding of the JCS SROE easily shifted to the SOUTHCOM ROE as 

they were very similar. 

ROE training should consist of briefings, situational training using 

vignettes, and lane training. Soldiers deploying from the 82d Airborne 

Division were already trained under the “R-A-M-P” principles.225 They 

were given refresher classes on the JCS SROE and instructed on how to 

adjust to the specific SOUTHCOM ROE. This adjustment to the 

SOUTHCOM ROE was reinforced with the use of vignette training, which 

was based on scenarios likely to be encountered on the ground in the AOR. 

JAs created these scenarios based on the information they received from the 

S-2. Immediately prior to deployment, soldiers were issued SOUTHCOM 

ROE cards. 

Once deployed, JAs must continuously assess the level of ROE 

understanding and training throughout the operation. Service members will 

always be arriving in the AOR, and some may not have received adequate 

ROE training. Further, ROE training is not a one time exercise. ROE 

training must be continuous. Otherwise, ROE knowledge and skills will 

deteriorate. However, JAs must keep the logistical limitations of the AOR 

in mind. Overhead projectors, PowerPoint projectors, and even a chalkboard 

may be difficult to obtain. JAs must have several methods available for 

teaching and training ROE in theater. 

225 R-A-M-P is a mnemonic training device for training rules of engagement (ROE) principles. It stands for 

R – Return fire with aimed fire, A – Anticipate attack, M – Measure the amount of force used if time and 

circumstances permit, and P – Protect with deadly force only human life and property designated by the 

unit commander. See Major Mark S. Martins, Rules of Engagement for Land Forces: A Matter of Training, 

Not Lawyering, MIL. L. REV. 143 (Winter 1994). 

99 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

JAs should stay abreast of operations to make sure the ROE continue 

to fit the mission. JAs should travel throughout the AOR, if possible, to 

ensure consistent ROE training. If there are problems with the actual ROE, 

JAs should discuss these issues with the commander to determine if a ROE 

change is required. However, be aware that in disaster relief operations, 

permissive ROE are unlikely. Requests for supplemental ROE will be the 

exception rather than the rule. 

3. ROE can only be modified by the appropriate authority. 

As previously mentioned, force protection was the primary concern of 

JTF-Aguila. The S-2, in coordination with counter intelligence personnel, 

was primarily responsible for the force protection program. As the mission 

progressed, some intelligence personnel wanted to modify the ROE to 

coincide with the internally generated threat conditions of the force 

protection program. SOUTHCOM ROE guidance provided that only 

SOUTHCOM could modify the ROE. At this juncture, JA representation on 

the Force Protection Working Group (FPWG) was critical in providing a 

balance between the ROE and force protection. JAs sitting on the FPWG 

correctly advised that force protection measures must fit within the current 

ROE. If a commander believes that adequate force protection is not possible 

within the current ROE, the commander must request a modification of the 

ROE. The JA can assist in drafting the request and also assist the 

commander in determining if the requested changes are likely to be 

approved. Deployed judge advocates found that they could best contribute 

to the resolution of force protection issues by participating in the force 

protection working group. 

4. Be aware of other specific training that may be required in your AOR. 

JAs must keep in mind that Unified Commands may have specific 

training requirements that must be completed before entering their AOR. 

SOUTHCOM requires all U.S. Forces entering its AOR to undergo human 

rights training in accordance with SOUTHCOM Regulation 1-20, Human 

Rights Policy and Procedures.226 JAs deploying for Hurricane Mitch relief 

operations were aware of this because of their early coordination with the 

JAs at USARSO and SOUTHCOM. This regulation was obtained from 

226 See Appendix E-2 for text of U.S. Southern Command Reg. 1-20, Human Rights Policy and Procedures 

(1 July 1998). 

100 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

SOUTHCOM, and training materials and human rights cards were created 

from the requirements in the regulation.227 JAs found that when the history 

of the region was discussed in conjunction with the human rights training, 

the training was well received. Service members appreciated the emphasis 

placed on human rights when they understood the history of insurgencies, 

civil war, and crime in the region. Country materials regarding the history 

and present status of the region can usually be obtained from the S-2 section. 

227 SOUTHCOM provided deploying JAs a portable training package to assist them in training the human 

rights requirements. See Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, 

Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 

1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). Transcript at 35. 

101 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

F. LEGAL ASSISTANCE 

1. Every judge advocate will practice legal assistance. 

All judge advocates should prepare to practice legal assistance. 

Lawyers will always be asked to practice legal assistance when there are 

soldiers nearby. With only one JA in Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Honduras, 

two in El Salvador, and troops scattered throughout each country, demand 

for legal assistance services was high. Meeting the demand was a challenge 

due to transportation constraints. The most common legal assistance issues 

were financial problems, the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act, and 

family law. Accordingly, access to domestic law resources from the 

soldiers’ home stations was very important. 

2. Conflicts of interest can arise and create significant issues.

228 

Deployed attorneys frequently encountered professional ethical issues. 

They were expected to serve both the interests of the command and 

individual clients. They were required to operate in very close quarters, 

often by themselves or with one other attorney. Such conditions will result 

in ethical conflicts. 

Two attorneys were assigned to the Joint Task Force (JTF) 

Headquarters in El Salvador. One attorney provided primary support to the 

Commander, Task Force Guatemala, and served as the primary provider of 

legal assistance in El Salvador. The command judge advocate served as the 

primary legal advisor to the JTF and subordinate commanders in El 

Salvador. Another attorney was permanently assigned to Task Force 

Nicaragua, and provided all legal services in that country. The “one stop 

shopping” legal support provided by these attorneys often presented them 

with ethical issues. Frequently, clients approached attorneys requesting 

assistance in matters dealing with the command. 

In El Salvador, where two attorneys were available, the command JA 

divided the areas of responsibility between himself and the other attorney. 

This allowed the attorney charged with providing legal assistance to deal 

228 This particular lesson learned on the issue of conflicts of interest and most all of its narrative are quoted 

almost verbatim from a Memorandum from Major Dale N. Johnson, Command Judge Advocate, Joint task 

Force Aguila, to Captain Drummond, J-5, Joint Task Force Aguila, subject: After Action review #6 – Staff 

Judge Advocate (16 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

102 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

with clients without conflict. The attorneys adhered to strict confidentiality 

and avoided sharing information related to client representation in other than 

their respective representational capacities. Because of the close quarters 

encountered in field conditions, every effort was made to respect client 

privacy. Interviews were conducted outside the command judge advocate’s 

presence. 

One example of such a conflict was the case of a soldier who wanted 

to marry a Nicaraguan citizen. The soldier’s command was opposed to the 

notion, but the JA had to act in his role as legal assistance attorney to the 

soldier and therefore assisted in making the arrangements. The soldier 

received counseling and advice from his chain of command and the 

chaplain. The U.S. Embassy assisted in the matter. The soldier got married 

in a civilian ceremony in Managua.229 Fortunately, the commander 

understood the JA’s role. 

All clients that presented issues dealing with the chain of command 

were advised, in writing, of the potential conflict. They were told of the 

attorney’s ethical obligation relating to client confidentiality and the unique 

conditions under which they were being provided legal assistance. They 

were then required to consent to representation by the legal assistance 

attorney, given those circumstances, following full disclosure. 

Attorneys should review the rules of professional conduct imposed by 

both their state bar and Army Regulation 27-26, Rules of Professional 

Conduct for Lawyers (1 May 1992)230 prior to deployment. See Appendix F: 

Extract of Army regulation 27-26, Rules of Professional Conduct for 

Lawyers. They must be sensitive to the potential for conflicts in situations 

where there are a limited number of legal advisors available to both the 

command and individual clients. Command judge advocates must establish 

systems to identify conflicts, inform clients of the potential for conflicts, 

229 Captain Scott Walters, Task Force Nicaragua Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for Law and 

Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and 

transcript on file with CLAMO). 

230 See DEP’T OF THE ARMY REGULATION 27-26, RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT FOR LAWYERS (1 May 

1992). Rules 1.7 through 1.10 are the primary Army rules on conflicts of interest, but there are many crossreferences within this regulation and attorneys should remember they are bound by their state bar rules, the 

Uniform Code of Military Justice, and other regulations. 

103 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

maintain client confidentiality, and provide alternative representation when 

conflicts arise.231 

3. Plan to provide cross-theater legal assistance support. 

The Hurricane Mitch relief effort required forces to be divided among 

four countries, at different and often remote bases and locations within each 

country. (See generally Appendix K3: Task Force Aguila Organization). 

Soldiers at the many forward operating bases (FOBs) needed legal 

assistance. To deliver services, JAs or their 71Ds had to make weekly trips 

to the remote camps.232 As with claims convoys in Bosnia, effective 

delivery of client services required planning in advance and notice to 

commanders, so that the commander could make soldiers requiring legal 

assistance available.233 

For future deployments, remote counseling might be the answer to the 

logistical challenge of providing cross-theater legal assistance support and to 

the ethical conflicts that can arise when only one judge advocate is present 

on the ground. Legal assistance for some soldiers could be provided by 

scheduled calls to home station attorneys, as was done in some cases for trial 

defense services (see section J.2. Ensure you have adequate Trial Defense 

Service (TDS) support before you deploy). Arrangements with legal 

assistance offices and attorneys at home station must be made ahead of time. 

For example, agree on certain days and times that the home station office 

will close its doors to clients and will instead man the phone and fax lines to 

remotely counsel deployed troops. Remote counseling could be especially 

productive in the legal assistance arena, where many of the issues and 

problems arise from matters back home. Of course, reliable 

communications are critical if this system is to work. 

231 Memorandum from Major Dale N. Johnson, Command Judge Advocate, Joint task Force Aguila, to 

Captain Drummond, J-5, Joint Task Force Aguila, subject: After Action review #6 – Staff Judge Advocate 

(16 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

232 See, e.g. Captain Scott Walters, Task Force Nicaragua Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for Law 

and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and 

transcript on file with CLAMO). 

233 JAs in Bosnia would organize and lead “claims convoys” to remote areas of the theater to intake, pay 

and investigate claims. Part of their success lay in announcing their scheduled stop locations and times 

ahead of time, and conducting them on a routine basis, so that locals could arrange their matters and for 

transportation ahead of time. See CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS, LAW AND MILITARY 

OPERATIONS IN THE BALKANS, 1995-1998: LESSONS LEARNED FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES, pp. 157-158 (13 

Nov. 1998). 

104 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

4. Have a strong Soldier Readiness Program (SRP) in place prior to 

deployments. 

Create an advance packet to improve the SRP process. A packet of 

materials that includes information papers on wills, will worksheets, powers 

of attorney, and the claims process will enable soldiers and family members 

to think about their legal needs before their unit conducts the Soldier 

Readiness Program (SRP) processing prior to deployment. When soldiers 

arrive at the SRP legal station, they can be better prepared with questions 

and information necessary to designate beneficiaries. 

5. Incorporate legal assistance issues into predeployment training. 

Predeployment training is an opportunity to practice “preventive law,” 

taking measures proactively to prevent or minimize legal issues and 

problems from arising once deployed into the area of operations. It is well 

known that rules of engagement, use of force and law of war instruction 

should be part of predeployment training. But preventive law can go beyond 

these immediate operational law issues. 

From the legal assistance discipline, predeployment training for 

commanders and soldiers should include a brief description of the Soldiers 

and Sailors Civil Relief Act (SSCRA) and what protections it does, and 

more importantly does not, provide. During the Hurricane Mitch relief 

effort, some commanders erroneously advised their troops not to pay bills, 

based on a lack of knowledge of the SSCRA. Other topics should include 

explanations of wills and powers of attorneys, who needs them and why. 

6. Bring the necessary resources. 

A few Legal Assistance-related items to note for any predeployment 

checklist include: 

•	 Bring a notary seal. 

•	 Bring phone books, directories, and rosters from soldiers’ home 

duty stations, and the Judge Advocate General’s Corps Personnel 

Directory. Deployed JAs cited these as indispensable items. 

105 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

G. CIVIL-ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
 

This section includes civil and administrative law issues, with the 

exception of contract and fiscal law. See section D. Fiscal Law for a 

discussion of those issues. 

1. Real Estate 

a. Base Camp Acquisition 

In each country, with the exception of Guatemala, the diplomatic 

notes negotiated prior to the JTF’s arrival called upon the host nations to 

provide basing support to U.S. forces as part of their contribution to the 

hurricane relief effort. Some of the land provided was on host nation 

military bases. In those cases, leases were not necessary, but Memoranda of 

Understanding (MOUs) were helpful in preventing or resolving potential 

issues. An example of a MOU for the use of host nation military facilities is 

at Appendix G-1: Draft Memorandum of Understanding for the Use of 

Facilities and Real Estate on Comalapa Air Base, El Salvador. An MOA on 

working relationships between the U.S. and the host nation military was also 

useful, and is at Appendix G-4: Memorandum of Agreement Concerning the 

Working Relationship Between Joint Task Force Aguila and the Second Air 

Brigade. When the U.S. Military sought to leave equipment for follow-on 

forces arriving for Expanded New Horizons, a MOU governing the prepositioning of equipment was also useful (see Appendix G-3: Draft 

Memorandum of Understanding Between the Commander of the Base Felipe 

Cruz and the 219th Red Horse Flight Commander Regarding PrePositioning of U.S. Equipment and Material in Guatemala, Base Felipe 

Cruz). 

Some leases for additional land were still required. When leases are 

needed, the Corps of Engineers (COE) negotiates and signs the leases. A 

sample lease is included at Appendix G-2: Lease Between Carlos Deshon D. 

and the United States of America. The six-page lease between Carlos 

Deshon D. and The United States of America demonstrates the utility of 

signing a lease. The lease specified a rent of “One Dollar ($1.00), U.S. 

Currency, for the lease term.” Why sign a six-page lease for $1.00? The 

lease precisely specified the land to be used, what the U.S. could do with 

that land, all rights and obligations of both parties, and the damage claim 

106 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

procedure. At the conclusion of the lease, the lessor claimed for, and was 

awarded, over $6,000 for restoration, waiving all future claims. 

JAs must obtain a copy of any applicable lease from the COE. The 

COE representative will often leave after leases are negotiated, and 

commanders and JAs will need to know the terms. JAs should be involved 

in the negotiation process when possible, as the COE representative has 

expertise in lease agreements, but may not know the unit or its mission. JAs 

must brief their commander on lease terms. JAs should also ensure that 

COE representatives document the condition of leased land and facilities. If 

COE does not do this, the JA should take the initiative to do it, using a 

digital camera. Documentation will save money in the end. 

b. Base Camp Maintenance and Improvements 

As discussed in the section on Fiscal Law lessons learned, some host 

nation military commanders requested base improvement projects 

inconsistent with the JTF humanitarian/disaster relief mission and associated 

funding. Notwithstanding commitments by their governments to provide all 

necessary facilities, some local base commanders sought U.S. assistance in 

improving their bases with minor construction projects. U.S. commanders 

sometimes felt pressured to support these local commanders. In other 

instances, commanders wanted to provide support in the spirit of good will 

and cooperation. 

In El Salvador, one proposal called for a written agreement, which 

would have committed the U.S. to certain base improvement projects in 

return for base support. The JA advised against it, and the commander did 

not enter into the agreement. On one facility, the local commander 

requested that the U.S. convert tent pads to basketball courts upon their 

departure. Such requests were clearly not related to the disaster assistance 

mission. 

Commanders sometimes sought to make improvements to buildings 

occupied by U.S. military forces. Such projects must facilitate Task Force 

operational requirements. Commanders may authorize maintenance and 

repair projects designed to facilitate U.S. humanitarian and/or disaster relief 

operations or designed to mitigate damage to existing base facilities 

resulting from U.S. Operations. 

107 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

An incidental long-term benefit to the host nation military does not 

preclude approval of such projects. However benefit to the host nation, 

alone, does not constitute a proper purpose. All projects must have a 

mission related purpose and be temporary in nature. When designing a 

project for temporary use, the focus should be on the duration and use of the 

facility by the U.S. military for the current deployment. 

Humanitarian and disaster relief missions are separate and distinct 

from security and foreign assistance missions. Many of the proposed base 

improvement projects either constituted military construction or were not 

directly related to the JTF’s humanitarian/disaster relief mission. Thus, 

commanders were advised not to perform such projects. 

c. Base Camp Closure 

Base camp closure issues included lease and waste disposal issues. 

Under some leases, the force was required to give 30 days notice for 

termination of leased facilities.234 This notice period allowed the lessor to 

file a claim for damage prior to termination of the lease. In the case of the 

Deshon lease, this provision was effective, and allowed the claim to be 

resolved prior to the departure of the force. In some cases, departing forces 

repaired damage prior to redeployment, thus avoiding future claims.

 Disposal of hazardous chemicals and medical waste is discussed in 

paragraph 2. Environmental Lessons, below. These issues must be resolved 

prior to the departure of U.S. forces in order to avoid claims. 

Because the Phase II participants redeployed prior to the arrival of the 

Phase III participants, MOUs were required in order to leave equipment for 

follow on forces. These MOUs generally proved effective. 

When possible, base-closing teams235 should be established to address 

these issues. Base closing teams document the condition of the property left 

behind. Documentation and photographs are added to real estate files to 

address future claims. 

234 Lease Between Carlos Deshon D. and The United States of America, Lease No. DACAO1-5-99-382, 

paragraph 9, at Appendix G3. 

235 CPT Scott Walters, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for Law 

and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and 

transcript on file with CLAMO). Transcript at 67. 

108 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

2. Environmental Lessons 

The disposal of medical and hazardous waste was the predominant 

environmental issue. Some host nations lacked processing capabilities to 

properly dispose of these wastes. While U.S. environmental laws generally 

do not apply overseas, U.S. policy, expressed in EO 12114, imposes specific 

requirements on U.S. actions abroad under certain circumstances.236 DoD 

Directive 6050.7, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Department of 

Defense Actions (31 Mar. 1979) and Army Regulation 200-2, Environmental 

Effects of Army Actions (23 Dec. 1988), set out requirements for 

consideration of environmental effects abroad.237 Treaties, such as the 

Basel Convention, may also govern the disposal or movement of hazardous 

waste abroad.238 

Even where there is no applicable host nation law, and where U.S. 

policy does not require consideration of environmental effects, foreign 

claims are likely to result if care is not taken in managing environmental 

waste. At the end of Phase II of the relief effort, units generally transported 

hazardous and medical waste back to the U.S. In one case, silver byproducts from X-rays were flown to the U.S. from Nicaragua, because the 

nation lacked appropriate disposal facilities. The only other option – 

handing the waste over to a local waste contractor, was determined likely to 

result in improper disposal, or dumping. The unit chose to bring the waste 

home with them, rather than risking potential environmental damage or 

poisoning of local water supplies. 

Insecticides presented a similar concern. In that case, insecticides 

were left with the proper host nation authorities, which agreed to use the 

insecticide for its intended purpose, in accordance with host nation laws, 

rather than disposing of it. 

236 Exec. Order No. 12114, 44 Fed. Reg. 1957 (Jan. 4, 1979); U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 6050.7, 

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ABROAD OF MAJOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ACTIONS (31 Mar. 1979); U.S. 

DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 200-2, ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ARMY ACTIONS (23 Dec. 1988). For a 

discussion of the laws applicable to U.S. Forces during deployment, see MAJ Karen V. Fair, 

Environmental Compliance in Contingency Operations: In Search of a Standard, 157 MIL. L. REV. 112 

(Oct. 1998). 

237 See MAJ Karen V. Fair, Environmental Compliance in Contingency Operations: In Search of a 

Standard, 157 MIL. L. REV. 112 (Oct. 1998). 

238 See MAJ Karen V. Fair, Environmental Compliance in Contingency Operations: In Search of a 

Standard, 157 MIL. L. REV. 112 (Oct. 1998). 

109 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

3. Liability Concerns
 

The provision of U.S. military services to civilians always raises 

liability concerns. In the first phase of the operation, it was necessary to 

transport aid workers with supplies. In one of these instances, the plane 

skidded off the runway. Fortunately, no one onboard was injured. These 

issues are unavoidable when transportation of civilians is required. 

None of the worst case hypotheticals occurred during the Hurricane 

Mitch relief effort. However, the issue was of concern to deployed JAs. 

Release forms are frequently used to mitigate the concern. The relative 

protective value of the form is debatable, but may lessen liability if an 

accident occurs. Deployed JAs wishing to develop a liability waiver form 

should work with the U.S. Army Claims Service.239 

Donated food, medicine, and pesticides also created liability concerns. 

These items can spoil or be misused. Some medicines were also donated. 

By regulation, the medicine could not be brought back into the U.S. Instead 

of destroying it, the medical team donated it as excess property to a local 

physician. Pesticides also could not be returned to the U.S. Proper disposal 

would have been difficult, if not impossible. The excess pesticides were 

judged safer than those being used by the host nation, and were donated to 

government authorities. Proper choice of recipient is obviously important. 

Ensure that the recipient has the necessary facilities and skill for proper use. 

A waiver might also be of use in these cases. 

239 http://www.jagcnet.army.mil/USARCS. 

110 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

H. FOREIGN CLAIMS 

Claims are an essential part of most overseas U.S. military operations. 

Claims against the United States in a deployed environment are usually 

addressed pursuant to the Foreign Claims Act (FCA)240. The purpose of the 

act is to “promote and maintain friendly relations through the prompt 

settlement of meritorious claims.” The FCA and the implementing 

regulations provide for a relatively straightforward method of 

compensation.241 The statute and regulations authorize payment in local 

currency to inhabitants of foreign countries for personal injury, death, or 

property loss caused by United States military personnel outside the United 

States. The basis of the claim may be either negligence or wrongful 

conduct.242 The local law of the country in which the claim arises provides 

the standards for determining both liability and damages.243 While fairly 

straightforward, these legal principles require practical knowledge for 

effective application in an operational setting. 

1. Establish claims procedures as soon as possible.244 

The timely processing of claims requires claims procedures to be 

established as early as possible in the operation. Foreign claims 

commissioners and unit claims officers should be appointed prior to 

deployment. A claims SOP should be created before deployment, or 

immediately upon arrival in country. 

The U.S. Army Claims Service appointed the deployed JAs foreign 

claims commissioners for the Hurricane Mitch operation.245 The Command 

JA for JTF-Aguila created, and had approved, a claims SOP before the end 

of November. This SOP required all company size and larger units to 

240 10 U.S.C. § 2734. If a Status of Forces Agreement is in effect for the country where the claim arises, it 

will likely lay out detailed procedures for the payment of claims by the U.S. and the host nation 

government. 

241 See U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE, DIR. 5515.3, SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS UNDER 10 U.S.C. §§2733 AND 2734 

(26 May 1966); U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY REG. 27-20, CLAIMS, Ch. 10 (1 Aug. 1995). 

242 See U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY REG. 27-20, CLAIMS, paras. 10-2a and 10-8 (1 Aug. 1995). 

243 See U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY REG. 27-20, CLAIMS, paras. 10-10a and 10-11a (1 Aug. 1995). 

244 JTF-Aguila did not process personal claims by U.S. service members while deployed due to a shortage 

of personnel. Personal claims were resolved upon return to home station. 

245 Due to the lack of logistical support, the USARCS appointment was rescinded and a new appointment 

was issued by USARSO. Information provided by CPT Scott Walters, JA. 

111 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

appoint a unit claims officer. See Appendices H-1: Claims Procedure 

Memorandum and H-2: Unit Claims Officer Appointment Guide. The unit 

claims officers were responsible for conducting claims investigations for 

their units, educating members of their units on the claims process, and 

coordinating claims processing within their units. All military vehicle 

drivers were given claims instructions that told them what to do in case of an 

accident as well as instructions in Spanish to be provided to local nationals 

involved in an accident with a military vehicle. The unit claims officer 

forwarded completed claims to the Command JA who reviewed the 

investigation to ensure it conformed to USARSO requirements. 

2. Who pays? 

Fostering good will among local nationals is a significant part of any 

disaster relief operation. The timely payment of valid claims will go a long 

way toward maintaining good relations with the host nation. In order to 

ensure claims are paid in a timely manner, close coordination between the 

supporting command’s claims and finance office at the outset of the 

operation is essential. Delays in the settlement of claims will have an 

adverse impact on mission accomplishment. 

The U.S. Army Claims Service took immediate action to appoint task 

force attorneys as foreign claims commissioners. However, there was a 

delay in determining how claimants would be paid after their claims were 

adjudicated. Pay agents in the Joint Operations Area did not have the 

authority to make such payments for several weeks. This was due in part to 

uncertainty about whether operations accounts could be reimbursed from 

claims funds. Commanders are reluctant to use scarce operations and 

maintenance funds for the payment of claims. This is especially true in a 

disaster relief operation where the demands on funds increase. Intervention 

by the supporting command’s resource managers eventually resolved the 

issue and pay agents were allowed to pay claimants in foreign currency from 

claims fund cites. 

Later in the operation, USARSO took over claims responsibility from 

the U.S. Army Claims Service. This sped up the adjudication and settlement 

of claims because UARSO was closer to the AOR, and USARSO was 

familiar with the day-to-day claims coming out of the AOR. Additionally, a 

class A agent was assigned to JTF-Aguila in late January 1999. The Class A 

agent accompanied the JA on claims missions, and was able to pay claims 

112 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

on the spot in the host nation currency from his own claims fund cite. This 

method of settling claims proved very effective.246 

JAs should establish liaison with the resource managers during the 

initial planning stages of the operation and develop a comprehensive plan for 

the adjudication and payment of claims. Normally, claims will not be a big 

issue at the outset of a disaster relief operation. However, as more forces 

enter and spread out through the AOR, claims issues will increase. JAs 

should use the initial claims respite to coordinate with higher HQ, resource 

managers and pay agents to determine how claims will be paid. 

3. Solatia payments may be an effective way to maintain positive relations 

with the host nation. 

With the large number of vehicles and heavy equipment involved in 

the disaster relief operations, accidents were inevitable. Solatia payments 

may offer an efficient and inexpensive means of resolving these sorts of 

incidents and maintaining the goodwill of the host nation. A Solatia 

payment is not a payment in settlement of a claim. It is nominal sum paid as 

an expression of sympathy or remorse to a victim. There is no legal 

obligation to pay, and payment is not an acknowledgment of liability. 

Solatia payments are made from a unit’s operations and maintenance funds, 

not from a claims account. Coordination with the Unified Command SJA 

should be made before initiating solatia payments in the AOR. 

JTF-Aguila successfully used solatia, or solatia-like payments as one 

means of settling minor incidents. On one occasion, a host nation civilian 

refused to move his truck, delaying port operations, after being involved in a 

minor accident with a military vehicle. The JTF commander paid him the 

equivalent of $25 to resolve the issue and he moved along. The JTF legal 

staff researched the issue and concluded that it is common practice in 

Central America to resolve such matters at the scene of the accident. 

Therefore, the JTF staff drafted a policy that allowed for the use of such 

payments, not to exceed $25 per incident, in situations where it would 

facilitate operations. See Appendix H-3: Memorandum on Solatia Payments. 

The policy contained explicit guidance prohibiting the use of such payments 

246 CPT Scott Walters, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for Law 

and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and 

transcript on file with CLAMO). Transcript at 57-59. 

113 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

in situations where normal claims procedures would apply and required task 

force commanders in the respective countries to personally approve the 

payments. 

Prior to deployment, claims attorneys should consult Army Regulation 

27-20, Claims (31 Dec. 1997) and DA Pam 27-162, Claims Procedures (1 

Apr. 1998) and the supporting claims office to determine whether local 

custom is consistent with the use of solatia payments. If appropriate, the 

task force command judge advocate should develop a solatia policy, which 

provides uniform guidance to commanders and explains the difference 

between solatia payments and the normal claims process. Judge advocates 

should then closely monitor the administration of the policy. 

4. Claim forms and instructions should be in the host nation’s language. 

Foreign claims were filed using a Standard Form 95, which is printed 

in English. Since most host nation citizens did not speak English, this 

presented a significant, time consuming problem in filing claims. In 

response to this problem, Standard Form 95 was translated into Spanish. In 

addition, each vehicle driver was given a letter, written in Spanish, which 

explained the claims procedures to potential claimants. Claims adjudication 

could have occurred more rapidly if claims forms in the host nation language 

had been available to units upon their arrival in country. 

114 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

I. INFORMATION OPERATIONS AND PUBLIC RELATIONS 

1. Information Operations must be integrated into the plan from the 

beginning. 

Information Operations (IO)247 were not conducted until late in the 

Hurricane Mitch relief efforts. Although the need for an Information 

Operations cell was identified early in the operation, the personnel identified 

to fill the slots did not arrive into the area of operations until mid-January, 

when the operation was drawing to a close: 

Their talents and experience would have been invaluable at the 

beginning of the operation to develop a detailed, coordinated 

Information Operations program, but it was difficult to 

coordinate a meaningful program at the end of the operation.248 

An information operation (IO) campaign is an essential element of the 

humanitarian assistance mission. Humanitarian assistance and disaster relief 

operations offer unique opportunities to build trust and friendship between 

the U.S. and host nations. This was especially true in Nicaragua, a country 

with which the U.S. has had strained relations for many years: 

A well thought out and synchronized IO campaign, coordinated 

by a Land Information Warfare Activity (LIWA) Forward 

Support Team (FST) from the outset of the operation, would 

have brought about a much more positive host nation 

perception of the U.S. military. Additionally, the IO effort 

247 Information Operations (IO) is defined by the Army as: Continuous military operations within the 

military information environment that enable, enhance, and protect the friendly forces’ ability to collect, 

process, and act on information to achieve an advantage across the full range of military operations; 

Information Operations include interacting with the global information environment and exploiting or 

denying an adversary's information and decision capabilities. See DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 

100-6, INFORMATION OPERATIONS, Glossary (27 Aug. 1996). IO is comprised of three types of operations: 

Command and Control Warfare (C2W), Civil Affairs (CA), and Public Affairs (PA). “C2W, CA, and PA 

are interrelated operations that are conducted to support the Army objective of achieving information 

dominance in any operational environment-combat or peace. See JOINT PUB 3-13.1, JOINT DOCTRINE FOR 

COMMAND AND CONTROL WARFARE (3 Feb. 1996). 

248 JOINT TASK FORCE AQUILA JOINT AFTER ACTION REVIEW, Observation #3 (Task Organization): Staffing 

of JTF Headquarters (1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

115 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

would have strengthened the U.S. and host nation bond by 

cultivating deeper trust and friendship.249 

Initially, in the absence of an IO campaign strategy, the Military 

Public Affairs Detachments (MPADs) carried the load and told the JTF 

story. Once established toward the end of JTF Aguila’s existence, more 

expansive IO operations provided a bridge to the follow-on operation forces 

for New Horizons projects. 250 

In disaster relief operations, an IO campaign can serve two critical 

functions: 

• Promote mission accomplishment. 

• Promote force protection and security. 

To integrate an IO plan for the beginning of a mission, identify 

functions specific to disaster relief operations and the appropriate 

components for carrying out those functions. Information Operations 

elements—PA, CA, PSYOP, etc.—should be integrated into the Time 

Phased Force Deployment List (TPFDL). 

In assessing IO functions and operators, remember CA, PSYOP, and 

PA elements are able to use the same communications media with 

essentially the same messages, to reach different audiences. CA and PSYOP 

personnel address local populations and enemy forces, respectively, while 

PA personnel address U.S. forces and national and international news media. 

CA and PSYOP personnel provide news and information to the local 

populace on the effects of operations.251 

2. Information Operations can promote mission accomplishment. 

Information Operations can promote mission accomplishment by: 

249 Captain Leonel Nascimento (Military Analyst, U.S. Army Center for Lessons Learned, CALL), Army 

Lessons Learned and Successful TTPs for Hurricane Mitch Humanitarian Assistance: JTF Commander’s 

Initial Impressions (1999). 

250 Captain Timothy M. Gilhool, U.S. Army, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History 

of Joint Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 

(February 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

251 DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 100-6, INFORMATION OPERATIONS, Ch.3 (27 Aug. 1996). 

116 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

• Boosting troop morale 

• Increasing troop situational awareness 

• Preparing locals for mission execution 

Keeping soldiers informed promotes their morale. Promoting the 

good work they are doing in the relief operation in the home media also 

boosts their morale. Public Affairs fulfills the commander's obligation to 

keep the American people and the soldiers informed.252 

Keeping soldiers informed of events throughout the area of operations 

increases their situational awareness and sense of mission and purpose. In 

deployments where information was scarce, many soldiers reported being 

unaware of their location, their surroundings, and the nationalities of other 

troops participating in the operation. Information Operations addressed to 

soldiers helps alleviate this lack of information. 

Information Operations also promotes mission accomplishment by 

keeping the local population informed. One example was the Medical 

Humanitarian Assistance Missions (MHAMs). Direct medical and dental 

care, primary care, veterinary care, and Preventative Medicine (PM) training 

and assistance missions were conducted. U.S. forces augmented local and 

Ministry of Health clinicians. In Guatemala and El Salvador, the JTF sent 

MHAM teams of 10-30 service members to prearranged towns and villages. 

The U.S. Psychological Operations and Civil Affairs teams, along with the 

host nation Ministry of Health, publicized these events to the local 

population for several weeks prior to the start date to ensure more people 

could be seen on these two to four day missions.253 PSYOP and CA teams 

were also used to promote sanitary practices and publicize safe drinking 

water sites so that people would not drink contaminated local water. 

The JTF PAO worked in the JTF Headquarters at Comalapa Air Base, 

El Salvador. They dealt exclusively with military media and concentrated 

252 With the broad scope and initiative given to soldiers and units today at every level, one of the primary 

tools the commander uses is the internal information program. Well-informed soldiers are likely to have 

higher morale and perform better. Soldiers need and want information from both external and internal 

sources and are interested in the public perception of an operation. See DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD 

MANUAL 100-6, INFORMATION OPERATIONS, Ch.3 (27 Aug. 1996). 

253 Captain Timothy M. Gilhool, U.S. Army, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History 

of Joint Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 

(February 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

117 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

on providing information to the deployed soldiers, sailors, airmen and 

marines. A Joint Information Bureau (JIB) was established to deal with nonmilitary media. They were located close to the U.S. Embassy in San 

Salvador to better utilize their resources and contacts. Over ninety percent 

of the PAO service members who served in the JTF came from twelve 

Reserve and National Guard Military Public Affairs Detachments (MPADs). 

These technicians and military photojournalists released 134 print stories 

and 26 broadcast stories to the media, several of which were published in 

home station newspapers and the Army Times. 254 

Civil Affairs played a significant role in promoting good will and 

mission accomplishment. It is vital for the local populace to understand what 

the U.S. is trying to accomplish and the benefits they will reap from the U.S. 

presence. Military Information Support Teams (MIST) worked in an array 

of jobs, from serving as interpreters to acting as diplomats to gain the 

confidence of the host country. MIST teams used several different means to 

communicate the truth about the operation and to disseminate safety 

concerns. Their efforts ranged from hanging up posters, to handing out 

fliers, to broadcasting messages from loudspeakers.255 

3. Information Operations can promote force protection and security. 

There is a “political dimension” to the disaster relief operations. “The 

Hondurans needed to be reassured that we were doing everything we 

could.”256 IO improved force protection by improving relations and thereby 

lowering threats to the force. 

Media coverage and relations are critical to putting the following 

messages out to the local populace of the affected region:257 

254 Captain Timothy M. Gilhool, U.S. Army, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History 

of Joint Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 

(February 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

255 “Behind the Scenes”, by SSG Tim Barnes, 361st Press Camp Headquarters, SOUTHCOM New 

Horizons website, http://www.ussouthcom.com/soughcom/newhorizons/articles/behindthescenes.html, 

April 26, 1999. 

256 CPT Daniel P. Saumur, JTF-BRAVO Command Judge Advocate, Honduras, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides on file with CLAMO). 

257 CPT Daniel P. Saumur, JTF-BRAVO Command Judge Advocate, Honduras, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides on file with CLAMO). 

118 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

•	 Explain the types of projects and work being done. Advertise the 

positive. But ensure there is an explanation of the limits of what 

can be done. It is important to avoid false expectations, hopes and 

promises and the concomitant resentment or anger that could 

result. 

•	 Explain that the military and relief communities are doing all they 

can. 

These messages and an effective Information Operations (IO) campaign can 

actually promote force protection and security by casting the soldiers in a 

friendly, positive light and ingratiating them in the minds of the host nation 

government and people. 

4. Information Operations must be sensitive to the “politics of 

compassion.” 

Information Operations personnel must be sensitive to the “politics of 

compassion.”258 There may be jealousy and competition for resources 

between nations, regions and even local communities. Strive to ensure 

different groups are treated fairly. There may also be competition among 

some of the relief providers for credit and praise. They want to demonstrate 

their contributions. 

Despite this possibility, NGOs and PVOs can be valuable in planning 

a good public affairs campaign. They, too, are interested in accentuating the 

positive and educating the public. They have a presence on the Internet and 

in foreign affairs departments, and have a variety of contacts for getting the 

word out.259 

258 COL Jacoby, as quoted by CPT Daniel P. Saumur, JTF-BRAVO Command Judge Advocate, Honduras, 

Address at the Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 

1999) (Power Point slides on file with CLAMO). 

259 See, e.g., Mr. Yan Schollaert, Country Director, CARE Nicaragua, Address at the Center for Law and 

Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and 

transcript on file with CLAMO). 

119 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

5. Visitors.
 

The presence of visitors during relief operations can seem like an 

intrusion. But most visitors in a relief operation such as Hurricane Mitch 

should be treated as special guests. 

Visitors to the area have a strong impact on the outcome of the 

existing operations and will most likely influence the future of 

overall operations and U.S. presence in the theater. 

Congressmen, senators, Department of Defense officials and 

senior government leadership will most certainly develop longterm foreign policy direction and funding, based on the 

impressions during their visit.260 

Important visitors to the Hurricane Mitch relief effort repaid the effort by 

providing a large relief package, which reimbursed U.S. military funds and 

extended the relief effort. 

260 Captain Leonel Nascimento (Military Analyst, U.S. Army Center for Lessons Learned, CALL), Army 

Lessons Learned and Successful TTPs for Hurricane Mitch Humanitarian Assistance: JTF Commander’s 

Initial Impressions (1999). 

120 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

J. MILITARY JUSTICE 

1. Attempt to resolve UCMJ jurisdiction prior to deployment. 

Resolving UCMJ jurisdictional issues occupied a significant amount 

of the deployed JA’s time. Brigade and Group commanders were all 

designated Special Courts-Martial Convening Authorities (SPCMCA) prior 

to deployment. However, several smaller provisional unit commanders, 

including battalion-size unit commanders, did not have courts-martial 

convening authority because their designation as a provisional unit 

commander did not include this authorization. General courts-martial 

convening authorities (GCMCA) can establish deployment contingency 

plans, which when executed, designate provisional units whose commanders 

have SPCMCA.261 JAs should review the appointment orders of provisional 

commanders to ensure they have the appropriate level of court-martial 

convening authority. 

Some provisional units deployed without orders assigning or attaching 

their personnel to the provisional unit for military justice purposes, although 

all provisional unit commanders had assumption of command orders. The 

JA must ensure that all personnel reporting into the JTF have orders 

attaching them to a unit for military justice purposes. If they do not, the JA 

must coordinate with the S-1 to have these personnel attached to a unit for 

UCMJ purposes. 

The JTF Commander was not designated a General Courts-Martial 

Convening Authority. The only GCMCA for the JTF AOR was CINCSO. 

Most units deployed to the AOR with their own plans for dealing with 

military justice matters. For serious offenses, some units planned to return 

the offenders back to home station for adjudication, while others planned to 

handle serious offenses in theater. However, with CINCSO as the only 

GCMCA for the theater, units were hesitant to handle serious cases in the 

JOA. JAs must identify the GCMCA as early as possible, and pass this 

information on to deploying units so they can devise a workable military 

justice plan. 

261 See U.S. DEP’T OF ARMY, REG. 27-10, MILITARY JUSTICE, para. 5-2 (20 Aug. 1999). 

121 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

2. Ensure you have adequate Trial Defense Service (TDS) support before 

you deploy. 

No TDS attorneys deployed to the AOR during Hurricane Mitch 

operations. Defense services for the JTF were provided by USATDS from 

USARSO and U.S.-based TDS offices. As a result, most Article 15 

counseling occurred by phone. Marginal telephone capabilities coupled with 

intermittent and slow fax capabilities greatly inhibited defense counsels’ 

ability to provide adequate legal support to their clients. Additionally, some 

TDS counsel were unwilling to conduct Article 15 counseling by phone and 

fax. Limited transportation between the JOA and Panama made it nearly 

impossible for defense counsel to provide services in person. On those 

occasions when service members flew to Panama to consult with defense 

counsel, they were often unable to return for a week or more.262 

One unit, the 36th Engineer Group from Ft. Benning, developed a 

support plan with the Ft. Benning TDS office prior to deployment. Soldiers 

called at designated times, and TDS attorneys were available to counsel 

them. This system worked for this unit because a support agreement was 

developed prior to deployment, with designated counseling times. 

The JTF Headquarters was capable of providing logistical support, 

office space, and transportation for a TDS attorney. Assigning a TDS 

attorney to the JTF would have resulted in better representation for service 

members and more timely military justice actions. One TDS attorney would 

have been adequate for JTF-Aguila based on the size of the JTF and the 

nature of the mission if adequate transportation were available. Future JTFs 

of a larger size or different mission may require more than one TDS 

attorney. Additionally, TDS attorneys may also require legal specialist 

support, which will impact the JTF logistics plan. 

262 Memorandum, Command judge Advocate, Joint Task Force Aguila, to Joint Task Force Aguila J-5, 

ATTN: Captain Drummond, subject: After Action Review #7 – Staff Judge Advocate (23 Jan. 1999) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

122 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

3. JAs must be prepared to assist commanders with mission-specific 

regulations. 

The Commander, JTF Aguila, implemented several orders and policy 

letters to help govern the force during operations. These orders and policy 

letters included General Order #1 (see Appendix J-4), Policy Letter #4, 

Force Protection, (see Appendix E-1), policy regarding solatia payments (see 

Appendix H-3), Commander’s Policy Regarding MWR Activities (see 

Appendix J-3), Commander’s Orders Regarding the Treatment of Cultural 

Objects (see Appendix J-2), and Off Limits Areas on Comalapa Air Base 

(see Appendix E-4). Obviously, these various orders and policy letters cover 

a broad range of topics, and the JA must be well versed in all to properly 

advise the commander. 

It is likely that commanders will issue a General Order #1 (GO #1) in 

future operations. General Order #1 is a punitive order, issued by the JTF 

Commander, which prohibits certain activities within the JOA that may 

prejudice good order and discipline or bring discredit to the JTF. Such 

prohibited activities may include the consumption of alcohol, entering 

certain places of worship, possessing privately owned firearms, and 

gambling. Many of the activities prohibited by GO #1 will be based on the 

host nation’s culture. For instance, GO #1 for Desert Shield/Storm 

prohibited the entering of mosques, the consumption of alcohol and the 

viewing of pornography because Saudi Arabia is an Islamic country. The JA 

must be aware of the cultural/religious prohibitions of countries in the JOA 

when advising commanders on the appropriate restrictions to include in GO 

#1. 

JAs must also be aware of activities prohibited by the Unified 

Command. SOUTHCOM prohibits the “consumption of alcohol by 

deployed units performing operational missions or participating in exercises 

under COCOM263 or OPCON264 of U.S. Southern Command.” See 

Appendix J-1: U.S. Southern Command Policy memorandum – Consumption 

of Alcohol by Operations Forces Deployed in SOUTHCOM AOR. JTF 

Commanders are allowed to waive this restriction with subsequent 

notification to SOUTHCOM. The Commander, JTF Aguila took advantage 

of this provision and allowed JTF personnel on pass and participating in 

263 Combatant command. 

264 Operational control. 

123 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

MWR activities to consume alcohol. See Appendix J-3: JTF Aguila 

Commander’s Policy Regarding MWR Activities. 

124 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

K. PERSONNEL, TRAINING AND EQUIPMENT 

Major Dale Johnson, the Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, 

best summarized the key lessons learned in the areas of personnel, training 

and equipment in the following:265 

•	 Be prepared—Once the order comes, it’s too late! 

•	 Develop a legal operations plan. 

•	 Deploy the right JA at the right time. 

•	 Identify predeployment training requirements. 

•	 Learn the applicable law and identify key points of contact 

(POCs). 

•	 Continuously assess training. 

1. Prepare for deployment now. 

Be prepared. Once the order comes, it’s too late! 266 

Major Johnson at Fort Bragg had a trial the week of 1-6 November 

1998, then departed for Myrtle Beach for a weekend pass with his family. 

He was called that night at his hotel room. Two days later, on 8 November, 

he was on a plane bound for Guatemala. Captain Scott Walters at Fort 

Benning received a verbal warning order on 9 November, was told where he 

was going (Nicaragua) on 22 November, and landed in country on 25 

November: 

I got the word about two weeks before we left to prepare 

for movement. Main JAG missions prior to deployment 

were to coordinate with USARSO, JTF-BRAVO, and 

SOUTHCOM to find out how [the] Task Force would be 

organized, was there a SOFA, what are SOUTHCOM 

ROE, train soldiers on SOUTHCOM ROE, SOFA and 

Human Rights) (HR training is required before deploying 

in SOUTHCOM AOR), print ROE cards and Human 

265 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

266 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila: Legal Operations After Action Review (AAR) (March 

1999) (unpublished compilation, on file with CLAMO). 

125 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Right[s] cards, admin. and medical SRP, pack a field 

desk and footlocker with forms, ARs, laptops, hand off 

pending trials and remainder of jurisdiction to other TCs 

[Trial Counsel], etc.267 

There are many tasks the operational judge advocate, trial counsel, 

Brigade Operational Law Team (BOLT) Chief, and other attorneys can 

perform now, and on a regular basis, to better prepare for a short-notice 

deployment. A few examples include: 

•	 Have a predeployment checklist and rehearse it. (See 

Appendix K6: Sample Predeployment Checklist.) 

•	 War-game deployments. Discuss the escalating scale of 

contingencies with the Staff Judge Advocate. Develop an 

office-level plan on who will deploy and on how deployed 

JA’s positions will be back filled or their duties reassigned. 

This is a prime opportunity to develop a working 

relationship with aligned Reserve Component JAs. 

•	 Have a “battle box” loaded with legal references, materials, 

the RDL (Rucksack Deployable Law Office and Library) 

and its supporting equipment, and office supplies. 

•	 Run an efficient Soldier Readiness Program (SRP) for 

supported units, saving last minute waves of wills, powers of 

attorneys, family support plan issues, etc. 

2. Prepare a legal support plan for the operation. 

Have a legal support plan and staff it. This should be top 

driven, but should consider assets of task force units.

268 

During the Hurricane Mitch relief operation, there was no overarching 

legal support plan until a month into the operation. Major Dale Johnson 

was sent to Guatemala in the beginning of November to support the 

267 Email Message from CPT Scott Walters, Fort Benning, deployed to Nicaragua for Hurricane Mitch 

relief efforts, to CPT Tyler L. Randolph, Center for Law and Military Operations, subject: Hurricane Mitch 

AAR (20 Jan. 1999 12:09PM) (on file with CLAMO). 

268 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides on file with CLAMO). 

126 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

battalion-minus aviation task force (C/159th Aviation) from Fort Bragg. 

Captain Scott Walters deployed to Nicaragua from Fort Benning, Georgia, to 

support Fort Benning’s 36th Engineer Group. 1LT Mark Hannig deployed 

from Fort Lewis to support Fort Lewis’ 593d Support Group. Captain 

Daniel P. Saumur was already in Honduras as JTF-BRAVO’s Command 

Judge Advocate. Captain Tiernan Dolan was the only JA centrally selected 

and deployed by SOUTHCOM into the area of operations. He was sent to 

El Salvador in mid-November.269 

No formal assessment of the legal needs within the JOA occurred 

prior to deploying those attorneys. This resulted in inadequate270 and 

uncoordinated271 legal services within the JOA. 

After Major Johnson was selected to be the Command Judge Advocate 

for Task Force Aguila, and moved from Guatemala to El Salvador to join the 

JTF Headquarters, he assessed the needs for legal support and decided how 

to support operations with the JAs already in theater. After consulting with 

the Air Force commander of the Red Horse Squadrons in Guatemala, Major 

Johnson decided that the operation could be supported by “circuit riding,” 

periodically sending a JA (LT Mark Hannig) into Guatemala.272 

The lesson is that a legal support plan should be developed and 

implemented centrally by the major command’s Staff or Command Judge 

Advocate. Major Johnson recommends: 

The major command responsible for coordinating humanitarian 

operations within the JOA should assess the need for attorneys 

prior to deploying them with supporting forces. The 

assessment should include an analysis of the need for attorneys 

269 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

270 Joint Task Force Aquila Joint After Action Review, Observation #3 (Task Organization): Staffing of 

JTF Headquarters (1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

271 Memorandum from MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Command Judge Advocate, Joint task Force Aguila, to CPT 

Drummond, J-5, Joint Task Force Aguila, subject: After Action review #2-Staff Judge Advocate (18 

December 1998) (on file with CLAMO). 

272 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

127 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

with special skills and background, such as rank, field 

experience, language skills, deployment contracting training 

and claims experience.273 

a. Conduct Legal Preparation of the Battlefield (LPB) and METTTC (Mission, “Enemy,” Time, Troops, Terrain and Civilians) 

analyses. 

The developer of the legal support plan has two interrelated tools to 

assist, LPB (Legal Preparation of the Battlefield) and METT-TC (Mission, 

Enemy, Time Troops – Terrain, and Civilians). LPB was addressed in 

Lessons Learned section A. Legal Issues Confronted In a Foreign Disaster 

Relief Operation, and is also described at Appendix A. It is a device for 

predicting the type and quantity of legal issues that will arise through the 

phases of an operation. The METT-TC analysis should be conducted in 

conjunction with the commander and other staff members during the 

decision-making process. By tying the LPB-predicted flow of legal issues to 

the concept of the operation, a legal support plan will emerge. Then the 

decision of who to deploy may be made. The result should be a legal 

support plan that provides legal support to the operation throughout the area 

of operations for all needed phases. 

b. Task organize. 

[The] unit might not know it needs a lawyer...Sometimes, I am 

not sure the Commander always knows what he needs as far as 

legal support and I feel we have a role there...274 

FM 27-100, Legal Support to Operations, provides for flexible 

tailoring of legal support.275 SJAs decide how they will support a given 

operation based on anticipated needs and available resources. 

273 Memorandum from MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Command Judge Advocate, Joint task Force Aguila, to CPT 

Drummond, J-5, Joint Task Force Aguila, subject: After Action review #2-Staff Judge Advocate (18 

December 1998) (on file with CLAMO). 

274 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides on file with CLAMO). 

275 See DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS (1 Mar. 2000). 

128 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

Commanders also play a role in determining legal support. The 

Commander of the 7th Transportation Group decided not to send his 

assigned Judge Advocate, Captain Frank King, with his 10th Battalion, 

which deployed to Panama to conduct boat movements of supplies and 

equipment. Instead, a 71D, SSG Franklin, deployed. The commander was 

about to change command and wanted the JA available for the incoming 

commander. The Battalion Commander had requested that the JA go. In 

hindsight, given the number of fiscal, military justice, and other issues that 

arose, the JA believes he should have deployed.276 

In contrast, Major Dale Johnson, the Aviation Brigade Trial Counsel, 

originally deployed to be the advisor to Task Force Angel, a battalion-minus 

aviation task force from Fort Bragg. Once on the ground, Major Johnson 

found there were not yet a lot of legal issues. In hindsight, Major Johnson 

feels he would have been more useful back in garrison as the Trial Counsel 

for the remainder of the Aviation Brigade during that period of time.277 

While this may have been true for that unit, JAs should generally deploy as 

soon as possible to solve the initial legal issues. 

The JA for JTF Bravo in Honduras, Captain Daniel P. Saumur, did not 

feel legal augmentation was required for that JTF, but quickly saw the need 

for a legal advisor at JTF-Aguila. He recommended that SOUTHCOM 

provide the JTF JA, but that was not considered possible. He also 

recommended that the JTF-Aguila legal advisor establish a technical chain 

and oversight for the major issues throughout the AOR. Captain Saumur 

correctly forecast that the biggest issue would be fiscal law, followed by 

issues of ROE, force protection and jurisdiction for matters of military 

justice. 278 

276 Interview with Captain Francis (Frank) P. King, former Command Judge Advocate for the 7th 

Transportation Group, Fort Eustis, Virginia, conducted at the Judge Advocate General’s School, 

Charlottesville, Virginia (16 March 16, 2000). 

277 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

278 Email message from CPT Daniel P. Saumur, Joint Task Force Bravo, Honduras, to COL Roberts and 

LTC McCallum, Headquarters, U.S. Army South, Antonio J. Vazquez, subject: RE: JTF BRAVO SITREP 

(November 11, 1998 3:29PM) (on file with CLAMO). 

129 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(1) Consider the size of the area of operations and obstacles 

to travel and communication. 

(a) Dispersion of Personnel and Operations 

U.S. military units in Central America were spread over 500 

kilometers from Guatemala to Nicaragua and extended all the way down to 

Panama. 279 Units in El Salvador were consolidated. In Nicaragua, units 

operated out of several forward-operating bases (FOBs) spread over 250 

kilometers. The dispersion led to more disciplinary issues and more claims, 

increasing the need for legal support and the difficulty of delivering it.280 

JTF-Bravo was successful with one JA, but it was already a standing 

JTF, with a fixed base of operations. Captain Saumer, the task force JA, had 

already spent months as the legal advisor. These advantages were not 

present in the other three nations. Whenever possible, JAs should deploy as 

2-member teams when personnel and operations are as dispersed as they 

were in Hurricane Mitch. 

(b) Judge advocate support must be mobile. 

Each judge advocate must be able to move throughout their portion of 

the AOR to support the commander and mission. Commanders become 

accustomed to taking “their Judge” with them on missions lasting hours to 

days. Handling claims (intake and payment) can mean frequent travel to 

remote areas. With an overnight rucksack and the RDL,281 judge advocates 

were ready to travel with a representative of the command group at any time. 

Transportation plans must also be developed for these missions, which often 

require multi-vehicle convoys. 

279 Captain Timothy M. Gilhool, U.S. Army, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History 

of Joint Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 

(February 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

280 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

281 The RDL is a proven set of off-the-shelf capabilities that includes a laptop computer, CD-ROM, modem 

and network capabilities, scanner, printer, digital camera, TACSCAT phone, appropriate set of hardware 

and software, and hard-shell case. See DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO 

OPERATIONS, par. 4.4.1 (1 Mar. 2000). 

130
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

(2) Remember key cells and operating groups: the 

DJTFAC. 

In developing a legal support plan, integration with the commander 

and the planning staff is of the utmost importance. One of the first military 

units to deploy was SOUTHCOM’s Deployable Joint Task Force 

Augmentation Cell (DJTFAC). It did not include a JA, but should have. As 

previously stated, there was no JTF JA or centralized legal support concept 

until more than a month into the operation. 

The DJTFAC is not a standing organization with specified manning, 

but rather a tailored organization (usually 25-35 personnel) drawn from 

CINC headquarters and other nearby service component personnel. These 

hand picked augmentees provide joint and area expertise in key positions on 

the JTF staff and are specially trained in crisis action procedures at the 

operational level of war. All DJTFAC members perform their normal staff 

duties at their parent commands while on call as DJTFAC members. When 

called, they provide joint perspective, enhance the JTF’s operational 

expertise, and provide theater-level expertise on the region’s issues. In 

short, the DJTFAC is a tool to complete the JTF commander’s staff, 

transforming it from a single-service or area headquarters to a fully capable 

JTF. The CINC transfers Operational Control of all DJTFAC members to 

the JTF commander. 

The DJTFAC, though thoroughly versed in crisis action planning, is 

not limited to future operations planning. Members serve wherever the JTF 

commander needs them. Special staff, such as medical and legal experts, is 

routinely included as augmentees by some combatant commands, and such 

experts should always be included as augmentees in disaster relief 

operations. 

c. Choose the right JAs and 71Ds for the mission. 

(1) Consider deploying the JAs and 71Ds organic to the task 

force units. 

JTFs are generally organized on an ad hoc basis. The supporting 

headquarters element is sometimes put together in the same fashion. 

131 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

An ad hoc staff initially lacks cohesion, standing operating 

procedures, and methods of operating. Whenever possible, JAs should 

deploy with organizations with which they have an established relationship. 

Major Dale Johnson deployed from Fort Bragg with Aviation Task 

Force Angel. He was later appointed to be the JTF Aguila Command Judge 

Advocate. He had no prior relationship with SOUTHCOM or the other JTF 

staff members. While he performed extremely well, it took longer for him to 

develop relationships with the staff. He would have liked to have had an 

opportunity to coordinate in person with the SOUTHCOM staff prior to the 

deployment.282

 (2) Consider special qualifications specific to the operation. 

Other considerations to weigh when task organizing legal support to 

an operation include operational law experience, language skills, and prior 

experience in, or knowledge of, the area of operations. For example, 1LT 

Mark Hannig, who deployed from I Corps, Fort Lewis, with the 593d 

Support Group to become the Task Force El Salvador JA, was not the trial 

counsel for the 593d back at Fort Lewis. He was chosen because he spoke 

Spanish fluently.283 

(3) JAs must be “jacks of all trades.” 

In today’s legally complex operations, judge advocates must be “jacks 

of all trades,” proficient in all of the core legal disciplines and functional 

284 areas. 

Deployed attorneys face a large variety of legal issues. Within 

hours of arriving in theater, the attorney on the ground, Captain 

Dolan, briefed me on the ongoing issues at the outset of the 

282 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

283 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

284 See DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS (1 Mar. 2000). The 

six core legal disciplines are administrative law, civil law, claims, international law, legal assistance and 

military justice. The three legal functional areas are command and control, sustainment, and personnel 

service support (or support, for short). The practice of operational law consists of legal services that 

directly affect the command and control and sustainment of an operation. 

132 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

deployment: agricultural and customs requirements for 

redeployment; vector control; SOFAs; claims procedure; 

international movement; operation and general orders; 

demining; memoranda of agreement with host nation military 

installations; refugee camps; fiscal law and UCMJ jurisdiction. 

At that time Captain Dolan had been working within the Joint 

Operations Area (JOA) two weeks. The variety of issues 

expanded with time.285 

JTF-Aguila attorneys participated in Force Protection and Finance 

Management working groups.286 The JA should be ready, willing and able 

to pitch in with the rest of the staff in non-legal functions and 

requirements.287 Thus it is important for JAs to create leader professional 

development (LPD) opportunities to learn a variety of operational issues. 

Home station resources, such as officers from other branches, can expand 

the LPD program. There are also educational opportunities through 

correspondence and residential courses. 

The JA should be equivalent in rank with the rest of the JTF 

commander’s staff. Having a Major on the JTF staff and Captains on the 

individual (country) task force staffs worked well in this operation. Prior 

operational law experience or deployments are always desirable, but not 

required. 

Finally, special skills, such as language capability and familiarity with 

the area of operations can greatly enhance effectiveness. Language skills 

were critical to planning, coordination and claims. At least one member of 

the operational law team should have language skills, if possible.288 Those 

285 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

286 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

287 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

288 Language skills were necessary, but lacking, for most every aspect of the operation. For example, none 

of the sixteen helicopter pilots who flew relief missions in Nicaragua spoke Spanish. Only three of the 

sixty-five air crews in Nicaragua did. See, e.g., Ms. Lynn Vega, USAID Nicaragua Mission, Address at the 

Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power 

Point slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

133 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

JAs who came from USARSO had an advantage because they habitually 

work with MILGRPS and embassies in Central America, and have already 

developed working relationships. For example, this experience allowed the 

JA on the ground to assist in the negotiation of the diplomatic notes 

(DIPNOTE) with Nicaragua.289 

The attorney SOUTHCOM chose to deploy (Captain Tiernan Dolan) 

was particularly well suited because he was one of their Operational Law 

Attorneys, spoke Spanish, was familiar with the area of operations, and had 

personally dealt with the Military Groups (MILGRPS) and Embassies in 

each of the affected countries.290 But experience shows that well trained, 

highly motivated JAs perform well on deployment regardless of previous 

experience or special skills. 

(4) Properly Integrate 71Ds. 

The Army’s legal specialists (71Ds) are often under utilized. 

Deployed attorneys must be willing to integrate and support their legal 

specialists. At least eight 71Ds deployed to Central America.291 

(a) 71Ds are extremely versatile. 

The accomplishments of the 71Ds deployed in support of Hurricane 

Mitch relief operations were too numerous to list here. Two examples are 

provided to demonstrate the versatility of our legal specialists. One 71D, 

PFC Ruiz, deployed with 1LT Mark Hannig to Task Force El Salvador. In 

El Salvador at the JTF HQ, the JTF-ES attorneys worked in a building 

289 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

290 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

291 Deployed 71Ds included: SSG Scott A. Wilshire in Honduras (JTF B), SSG Franklin in Panama (7th 

Transportation Group, Fort Eustis, VA), SSG Robinson in El Salvador (46th Corps Support Group), SGT 

Madril Smith in Nicaragua (Fort Benning), SGT Wharton (189th CSB, Fort Bragg, NC), SPC Eaves in 

Nicaragua (46th Engineer Battalion, Fort Polk, LA), SPC Van Ekron in Guatemala, PFC Ruiz in El 

Salvador (593d Corps Support Group, I Corps). 

134 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

alongside the CA, contracting officers and resource management personnel. 

This building also housed the HOC personnel so the entire building became 

known as “The HOC.” PFC Ruiz’s language and diplomatic skills were a 

great asset. She inserted herself into the operations of the HOC, Civil 

Affairs and the contracting officer. These personnel came to rely on her to 

perform a variety of tasks that facilitated the mission. 

Another 71D, SPC Van Ekron, worked in San Jose, Guatemala, 

without a collocated attorney. When 1LT Hannig visited Guatemala, he 

established a claims adjudication procedure with the Civil Affairs officers 

and with SPC Van Ekron as the lead investigator. The approval authority 

was Major Johnson in El Salvador, but a legal Specialist had the lead for all 

foreign claims in that nation. 

(b) Support your 71Ds. 

JAs must actively monitor and support 71Ds. Legal specialists are normally 

attached to a unit and are therefore assigned unit duties in addition to their 

legal duties. The unit may not have a full appreciation of the scope of the 

71D’s legal duties and the time that may be required to perform the duties 

satisfactorily.292 The situation may be especially difficult for the legal 

specialists if they are junior in grade and there is no legal NCO attached to 

the unit. Deployed attorneys should maintain close communication with the 

71D’s platoon sergeant, first sergeant, and unit commander so that they 

understand the legal duties assigned to the legal specialist. 

One legal specialist in Central America was diverted by the personnel 

section. Because they did not appreciate the demands and value of her legal 

duties, they frequently assigned her non-legal work.293 As a result, there was 

no legal representation in the HOC. Another legal specialist at a remote 

location was so overburdened with non-legal duties that she had difficulty 

performing her claims investigation duties.294 

292 This situation occurred in the JTF-A countries of El Salvador and Guatemala. The legal specialists 

investigated claims, but also performed duties in support of the units to which they were attached. 

293 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

294 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

135 
 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Deployed attorneys should immediately assess their 71D legal 

support. The attorney should inform the local chain of command of the legal 

work to be performed by the 71D. Communication requirements increase 

when the 71D is attached to a unit for deployment other than one to which 

they are permanently assigned.295 

d. Establish a JA technical chain. 

Lack of a judge advocate technical chain and failure to develop a 

centralized legal support plan could have resulted in duplication of efforts, 

conflicting opinions, and forum shopping. Technical channels must be 

established to avoid these issues. 

During Mitch operations, attorneys did not adequately coordinate 

legal opinions with their counterparts at each echelon of command. Several 

attorneys, both within the JOA and outside the JOA, provided legal opinions 

relating to JTF operations. On several occasions, both the JTF CJA and 

USARSO attorneys provided opinions regarding the same issues to different 

staff elements. Those personnel, in turn, passed that advice back to the JTF. 

While the legal opinions were generally consistent, this process resulted in 

duplication of effort. 296 Forum shopping was sometimes an issue as well. 

This made coordination through JA technical chains all the more 

important.297 

Major Johnson, the TF CJA, summed up the lesson learned as 

follows: 

Failure to coordinate legal advice results in a duplication of 

effort and confusion among commanders and critical staff 

elements. Recommendation: Supporting command staff judge 

295 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

296 Memorandum from MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Command Judge Advocate, Joint task Force Aguila, to CPT 

Drummond, J-5, Joint Task Force Aguila, subject: After Action review #5-Staff Judge Advocate (9 January 

1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

297 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

136 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

advocates should coordinate all legal advice affecting task force 

operations through the JTF CJA and keep him or her informed 

of any opinion rendered affecting the JTF. The JTF CJA 

should, in turn, update supporting staff judge advocates 

regarding those key legal issues that impact upon supporting 

commands. Supporting commanders and their staff must 

understand that the JTF has one legal advisor and the legal 

community must speak with one voice. This requires close 

coordination between attorneys.298 

e. Check the TPFDL (Time Phased Force Deployment List). 

There are many participants in an operation that are crucial to mission 

success. Judge advocates should carefully check the TPFDL (Time Phased 

Force Deployment List) for both JA deployment slots299 and for other 

personnel critical to the legal mission:300 

• Trial Defense Service301 

• Civil Affairs 

• Public Affairs 

• Military Police302 

298 Memorandum from MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Command Judge Advocate, Joint task Force Aguila, to CPT 

Drummond, J-5, Joint Task Force Aguila, subject: After Action review #5-Staff Judge Advocate (9 January 

1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

299 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila: Legal Operations After Action Review (AAR) (March 

1999) (unpublished compilation, on file with CLAMO). 

300 See e.g. Email Message from CPT Scott Walters, Fort Benning, deployed to Nicaragua for Hurricane 

Mitch relief efforts, to CPT Tyler L. Randolph, Center for Law and Military Operations, subject: Hurricane 

Mitch AAR (20 Jan. 1999 12:09PM) (on file with CLAMO) (describing need for Military Police). 

301 See section J. Military Justice for a discussion of TDS requirements. One commander evacuated a 

potential defendant to Panama in order to ensure the soldier received proper legal advice prior to turning 

down an Article 15. See Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to 

Staff Judge Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint 

Task Force-Aguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). See also Email 

Message from CPT Scott Walters, Fort Benning, deployed to Nicaragua for Hurricane Mitch relief efforts, 

to CPT Tyler L. Randolph, Center for Law and Military Operations, subject: Hurricane Mitch AAR (20 

Jan. 1999 12:09PM) (on file with CLAMO). 

302 “A platoon of MPs w[ith] some MPIs [Military Police Investigators] would have been quite helpful for 

traffic liaison/enforcement, accident investigations, criminal investigations, etc. [They] [w]ould have also 

been helpful to have them here when I was coordinating for Military Working D[og] (drug detection) 

support.” Email Message from CPT Scott Walters, Fort Benning, deployed to Nicaragua for Hurricane 

Mitch relief efforts, to CPT Tyler L. Randolph, Center for Law and Military Operations, subject: Hurricane 

Mitch AAR (20 Jan. 1999 12:09PM) (on file with CLAMO) (describing need for Military Police); CPT 

Scott Walters, Task Force Nicaragua Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for Law and Military 

137 
 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

•	 Contracting Officers and Ordering Agents (See section D.7. Fiscal 

Law - Unauthorized Commitments) 

•	 Class A Agents for paying claims (See section H.2. Who Pays?) 

•	 Linguists303 

Equipment arrival must also be considered. Poor synchronization of 

equipment movement slowed the initial humanitarian response. 

The Reception, Staging, Onward Movement, and Integration 

(RSOI) process is just as applicable in humanitarian assistance 

operations as in wartime operations. The JTF must synchronize 

personnel and equipment flow to build humanitarian assistance 

capability as surely as a combat unit must build its “combat 

power” in a wartime contingency deployment.304 

3. Conduct a predeployment training program. 

One of the key issues on a short notice deployment, like Hurricane 

Mitch is predeployment training. Predeployment training consists of 

standard, mission-specific, and theater-specific training. Topics include, but 

are not limited to: 

•	 Rules of Engagement 

•	 Human Rights (a SOUTHCOM requirement in their AO) 

•	 Force Protection and Terrorism 

•	 Legal Assistance and preventive law instruction. 

•	 Preventive fiscal and contract law instruction to prevent 

unauthorized commitments. 

Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides and transcript on 

file with CLAMO). 

303 Linguists were needed, but unavailable throughout much of the JOA. Although many soldiers were able 

to speak Spanish, they often did not have the written or spoken proficiency necessary to consistently 

communicate with the host nation governments. Although the JTF requested linguists be deployed to 

support the operation, the request was not acted upon. See Joint Task Force Aquila Joint After Action 

Review, Observation #3 (Task Organization): Staffing of JTF Headquarters (1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

Judge advocates had some internal Spanish language capability. At least two JAs and two 71Ds spoke 

Spanish. 

304 Captain Leonel Nascimento (Military Analyst, U.S. Army Center for Lessons Learned, CALL), Army 

Lessons Learned and Successful TTPs for Hurricane Mitch Humanitarian Assistance: JTF Commander’s 

Initial Impressions (1999). 

138 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

Topics and content must be tailored to the audience. For example, 

preventive fiscal and contract law instruction is more appropriate for the 

commanders and staff than for all the ground soldiers. The level of training 

should also be adjusted based on the audience. 

In mission-specific or theater-specific predeployment training, it is 

important to give soldiers an overall concept of the mission, operations and 

the commander’s intent, and to put it all in context. An important part of 

context is instruction on the background of the area in which the soldiers 

will be working.305 While not a JA responsibility, JAs can suggest such 

training. It was very helpful for our soldiers to have background information 

and historical context concerning the civil wars and insurgencies in 

Guatemala, El Salvador, and the complex relationship between Nicaragua 

and the U.S. Military Groups provided some briefings in country. 

Not all soldiers arrive trained. Thus in-theater training was a 

continuous requirement. In-theater training allowed adaptation of generic 

predeployment training to “ground truth.” In predeployment training of the 

troops, Major Johnson recommends: “Distill it to a 3x5 card: More is too 

much.”306 

4. Bring the resources, equipment and materials you will need into the 

theater. 

Judge Advocates are often required to coordinate transportation, 

tentage, and supplies independently.307 Integration with command, staff and 

appropriate headquarters units now is the solution for organic JAs. Nonorganic JAs must develop a relationship with the company or camp 

commander, and provide a list of requirements. Do not expect your needs to 

be anticipated. 

305 See, e.g., MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the 

Center for Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power 

Point slides on file with CLAMO). 

306 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides on file with CLAMO). 

307 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides on file with CLAMO). 

139 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

a. Vehicles 

Lack of vehicles and transportation is always an issue for judge 

advocates. The legal mission demands the JA and the legal specialist be 

mobile. This was especially true in Hurricane Mitch, where legal coverage 

was limited to one to two JAs and one to two 71Ds per country. Added to 

this are the convoy and security restrictions that usually apply. In 

Nicaragua, driving and flying were only permitted in daylight. A minimum 

of two vehicles with armed guards were required for convoys. Thus prior 

coordination with the supported command for transportation support is 

critical.308 

b. Communications 

Hurricane Mitch validated the need for, and value of, the RDL.309 

Internet access was key during this operation.310 The JAs in El Salvador had 

full Internet connectivity through a satellite feed in their GP-medium tent.311 

In Guatemala, however, they did not have Internet or Email access except 

through use of the Military Group’s facilities at the U.S. Embassy. 

Communications were via tactical satellite for talking to aircraft and by 

cellular phone, though cost concerns limited their use. 

Communications in short notice deployments to remote regions will 

initially be unreliable and scarce, especially in disaster relief operations 

where much of the host nation infrastructure will be damaged. This makes 

predeployment preparation of resources and references all the more critical. 

Information-packed CDs such as the U.S. Army Publication Agency’s 

“Army Electronic Library” prove invaluable. Since the Hurricane Mitch 

operation the Center for Law and Military Operations has developed the 

Deployed Judge Advocate Resource Library CD-ROM with hundreds of 

308 Note: There is doctrinal support, now, for judge advocates requesting vehicle support from units. See 

DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS, par. 4.4.2 (1 Mar. 2000). 

309 See generally DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS, pp. 4-26 – 

4-28 (1 March 2000) (describes the Rucksack Deployable Law Office and its components). 

310 CPT Tiernan Dolan, Task Force El Salvador Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for Law and 

Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point slides on file 

with CLAMO). 

311 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides and transcript on file with CLAMO). 

140 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

documents in all six core legal disciplines. JAs are also encouraged to 

download JAGCNET databases from Lotus Notes to their hard drives or to 

CDs. 

For the Hurricane Mitch relief effort, commercial cell phones and 

INMARSAT satellite voice communications systems provided initial 

communications links. Once on the ground, units of the 93d SIG installed, 

operated and maintained a wide range of services, linking the entire JOA of 

six different countries, including the United States and U.S. military 

installations in Germany and Panama. Services included both DSN and 

commercial phone lines; e-mail access, to include linking in to home station 

e-mail accounts; classified (SIPRNET) and unclassified (NIPRNET) access 

to the Internet; AUTODIN message traffic; and single and multichannel 

Tactical Satellite (TACSAT) capability. 

Soldiers also distributed and installed over 300 tactical phones, some 

specifically for MWR calls, as well as over 70 miles of wire and cable. This 

resulted in complete communication connectivity throughout the JOA. In 

addition, each of the individual forward operating bases (FOBs) in 

Nicaragua had a manpack single channel single channel TACSAT providing 

continuous voice link with both Managua and the JTF Headquarters. Signal 

soldiers helped establish data links for several important military computer 

systems: The Army Medical Management System (TAMMS); the Standard 

Army Retail Supply System – Objective (SARSS-O); and the Enhanced 

Deployable Imagery Product Archive (EDIPA).312 

Bottom line – the soldiers of the 93d Signal Brigade made 

communications seamless and transparent for the JOA. There 

was little if any disruption during the entire operation. Their 

hard work made many other service members’ jobs a lot easier 

and set the stage for Operation Fuerte Apoyo’s success.313 

312 CPT Timothy M. Gilhool, U.S. Army, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History of 

Joint Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 (February 

1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

313 CPT Timothy M. Gilhool, U.S. Army, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History of 

Joint Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 (February 

1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

141 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

c. Resources and References 

At a minimum, deploying judge advocates should deploy with RDLs, 

the Operational Law Handbook, and the Center for Law and Military 

Operation’s Deployed Judge Advocate Resource Library on CD-ROM. To 

be fully prepared, the JA should prepare a ready-to-go “battle box” of 

materials, references and resources that needs only the addition of missionspecific or theater-specific materials. See Appendix K-6: Sample 

Predeployment Checklist. 

No single individual can be expected to have experience in all 

the types of legal issues that will arise during a deployment. 

Deployed attorneys must use resources that give access to 

information required in order to render cogent legal opinions.314 

Theater-specific materials include status of forces agreements 

(SOFAs), diplomatic notes (DIPNOTES), local regulations and policies, e.g. 

SOUTHCOM’s Human Rights Regulation, and more. Prior to deploying, 

attorneys should contact the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate (OSJAs) that 

includes the deployment area as part of its normal area of operations. 

Deploying attorneys should also obtain points of contact for all 

MILGROUPS, embassy political officers, and OSJAs in the operating areas, 

telephone and personnel directories for the JAGC and the AO’s major 

commands, the Center for Law and Military Operations, and other resources. 

5. Personnel Transition 

At any point during an operation, a JA may have to conduct a “battle 

handoff” of duties to another JA or legal specialist. This can arise due to 

rotation of personnel, the need for the JA to temporarily deploy to another 

part of the AO, or other reasons. It is important to maintain a good log and 

314 Memorandum from 1LT Mark W. Hannig, Judge Advocate, Task Force Aguila, to Staff Judge 

Advocate, I Corps and Fort Lewis, subject: After Action Review for JAGC Work During Joint Task ForceAguila (JTF-A)—Redeployment (27 January 1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

142 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

filing system.315 This was particularly true for claims files, justice issues, 

contracts and contract closeouts.316 

6. Redeployment 

The legal support plan must be continually reassessed and modified in 

light of changing circumstances. Redeployment of JAs is not necessarily 

directly related to redeployment of the task force main body. Closing out 

contracts, real estate, disposition of property, and other legal issues often 

necessitate leaving a JA in place after the main body redeploys.317 

U.S. Forces completed all engineer and medical projects by the 

second week of February 1999. The JTF executed a methodical step-down 

redeployment, initially closing down operations in Guatemala, then El 

Salvador (minus the JTF Headquarters), followed by Nicaragua. Task 

Forces stood down and reverted back to control of JTF Bravo in Honduras as 

they completed their projects. JTF-Nicaragua completed its last project, the 

medical clinic at Wiwili, on 10 February 1999 and completed its convoys to 

Puerto Corinto on 19 February 1999. Control of all of the countries in the 

JOA was formally transferred on 20 February 1999. Service members and 

units of Joint Task Force Aguila returned to their respective duty stations by 

26 February 1999.318 The JTF Command Judge Advocate, Major Dale 

Johnson, and Task Force Nicaragua Judge Advocate, Captain Scott Walters, 

redeployed on or about 22 February. (See Appendix K-4: Army JA 

Deployment Timeline.) 

The JTF commander wisely started planning for redeployment before 

the first thirty days of deployment had passed. He made use of the 

DJTFAC’s last five days on the ground and directed them to plan the 

315 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila: Legal Operations After Action Review (AAR) (March 

1999) (unpublished compilation, on file with CLAMO). 

316 MAJ Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila Command Judge Advocate, Address at the Center for 

Law and Military Operation’s Hurricane Mitch After Action Review (Apr. 23-24, 1999) (Power Point 

slides on file with CLAMO). 

317 Major Dale N. Johnson, Joint Task Force Aguila: Legal Operations After Action Review (AAR) (March 

1999) (unpublished compilation, on file with CLAMO). 

318 CPT Timothy M. Gilhool, U.S. Army, Strong Support and Expeditionary Standards: A Brief History of 

Joint Task Force Aguila During Operation Fuerte Apoyo, 7 November 1998 – 22 February 1999 (February 

1999) (on file with CLAMO). 

143 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

redeployment.319 Judge advocates should also consider redeployment when 

handling legal issues to ensure appropriate provisions are written into real 

estate leases, land use agreements, and contracts for eventual close out. 

319 CPT Leonel Nascimento (Military Analyst, U.S. Army Center for Lessons Learned, CALL), Army 

Lessons Learned and Successful TTPs for Hurricane Mitch Humanitarian Assistance: JTF Commander’s 

Initial Impressions (1999). 

144 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

L. RESERVE COMPONENTS 

This section highlights contributions made and important lessons 

learned by reserve units and reserve judge advocates. The Center 

encourages submission of materials and after action reviews by reserve 

judge advocates. 

1. Outline of the Operations 

I’d like to point out that this has been a great effort between 

the Guard, the Reserve, and the active duty force...” 

Capt. Mike Doubleday, USN, DASD (PA)320 

There were three phases of the humanitarian assistance and disaster 

relief operations for Hurricane Mitch. Reserve—Army (USAR) and Air 

Force (USAFR), and National Guard (NG)—Army (ARNG) and Air (ANG) 

units participated throughout the relief effort. Their role and responsibilities 

increased through the phases. 

a. Phase I: The Emergency Phase 

The emergency assistance phase started during the storm and ran 

through 28 November 1998. During and immediately after Hurricane Mitch, 

CINCSOUTH relied primarily upon Active Component (AC) Forces for 

ground operations during the emergency phase of the disaster relief response 

plan. Joint Task Force Bravo (JTF-Bravo) was based out of Soto Cano 

Airbase in Honduras, which became the anchor point for operations in 

Central America.321 This phase involved primarily life saving missions and 

the emergency delivery of supplies and medical assistance. 

Transportation, however, was largely a Reserve Component (RC) 

operation. U.S. military C-130, C-141, C-17 and C-5 transport aircraft, 

primarily from the AFR and ANG, were the primary carriers.322 

320 News Briefing, Captain Mike Doubleday, USN, DASD (PA), U.S. Dep’t of Defense (10:35 a.m., Nov. 

25, 1998). 

321 News Briefing, Captain Mike Doubleday, USN, DASD (PA), U.S. Dep’t of Defense (10:35 a.m., Nov. 

25, 1998). 

322 News Briefing, Captain Mike Doubleday, USN, DASD (PA), U.S. Dep’t of Defense (10:35 a.m., Nov. 

25, 1998). 

145 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

By 25 November 1998, these Reserve units provided transport of over 

two and a half million pounds of food, almost a thousand pounds of urgently 

needed medical supplies, approximately 70,000 gallons of bottled water, and 

70% of the U.S. national inventory of iodine tablets. These operations lifted 

a total of 2,013 short tons of cargo through 28 November 1998.323 

b. Phase II: The Rehabilitation Phase 

Phase II, the Rehabilitation Phase, commenced 28 November 1998 

and ended on 20 February 1999. This second phase focused on 

infrastructure repairs required to re-establish the capabilities of the nations 

themselves to provide essential support and health services to the indigenous 

population. Not necessarily permanent and long-standing, these were 

immediate projects designed to assist the population in providing for their 

own health and basic needs. A second joint task force, Joint Task Force 

Aguila (JTF Aguila), was established at Comalapa Air Base, near the capital 

of El Salvador. This second task force assisted El Salvador, Guatemala and 

Nicaragua and left JTF Bravo to focus exclusively on Honduras, which was 

hardest hit by this disaster. 

There was a significant increase in the number of forces, 

approximately 5,700 troops for Phase II. These troops came from all four 

branches of the armed forces, drawn almost exclusively from CONUS, with 

a mixture of active component, NG and USAR troops. The majority of 

forces arrived by the end of the first week of December, 1998. About eighty 

C-141 equivalent airlifts transported the troops and designated equipment 

into the region. Most of these assets, particularly the engineers and their 

equipment, required to affect the repairs to the infrastructure, went by sea in 

four Military Sealift missions. The aviation component grew from 39 to 59 

aircraft with additional aircraft coming from the United States. Four intratheater aircraft were added to the inventory on the ground in Central 

America.324 

323 News Briefing, Captain Mike Doubleday, USN, DASD (PA), U.S. Dep’t of Defense (10:35 a.m., Nov. 

25, 1998). 

324 News Briefing, Captain Mike Doubleday, USN, DASD (PA), U.S. Dep’t of Defense (10:35 a.m., Nov. 

25, 1998). 

146 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

c. Phase III: The Restoration Phase (Expanded NEW HORIZONS) 

The concept for Phase III, the restoration phase, was to continue the 

assistance through one of the on-going engagement programs, the “NEW 

HORIZONS (NH)” (NUEVOS HORIZONTES) series of exercises.325 This 

phase was designed to complement the U.S. government’s efforts to work on 

the long-term and more permanent infrastructure. Phase III was conducted 

from February 1999, through September 1999. 

This last phase expanded the execution of the NUEVOS 

HORIZONTES series of programs, which had already been a major part of 

the SOUTHCOM’s regional engagement program. These exercises have 

taken place in Latin America, under SOUTHCOM, for 15 years and were 

formerly called Blazing Trails and later Fuertes Caminos.326 

NEW HORIZONS (NH) started as Army-only exercises for the 

ARNG and USAR, and evolved over the years as total force exercises to 

provide trained and ready soldiers, airman, sailors, and Marines. The 

exercises were conducted for training purposes. Infrastructure rehabilitation 

and development was incidental to the training taking place during the 

exercises. During the previous 15 years, more than 150,000 RC soldiers 

participated in this series of exercises, most during their two-week annual 

training periods. This exercise concept became an important tool in 

CINCSO’s regional engagement strategy.327 Task-organized around 

engineer and medical training missions, the exercises have significant 

logistical, communications, aviation, transportation, water production, and 

force protection elements. Each year, the ARNG and the USAR led two 

exercises each. 

325 Briefing, Colonel Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, Overseas 

Deployment Training—ARNG & USAR Response to Hurricane Mitch/Georges – Related Relief Efforts 

(“expanded” NEW HORIZONS Exercises – ENH) (Aug. 19, 1999). 

326 Briefing, Colonel Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, Overseas 

Deployment Training—ARNG & USAR Response to Hurricane Mitch/Georges – Related Relief Efforts 

(“expanded” NEW HORIZONS Exercises – ENH) (Aug. 19, 1999). 

327 Briefing, Colonel Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, Overseas 

Deployment Training—ARNG & USAR Response to Hurricane Mitch/Georges – Related Relief Efforts 

(“expanded” NEW HORIZONS Exercises – ENH) (Aug. 19, 1999). 

147 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Scheduled for FY99 prior to Hurricanes Mitch and Georges, New 

Horizons was to be a Total Army exercise. These included an ARNG-led 

exercise in Honduras, and an USAR-led exercise in Guatemala. The ARNG 

took the lead for JTF Lempira in Honduras and the USAR had the lead for 

JTF San Marcos in Guatemala. 

Faced with the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch, the Honduran 

Government requested a change in the exercise areas from Lempira (in the 

southwest) to Valle de Sula (in the North). In addition, five new exercises 

and a Forward Control Element were added to the NH program.328 These 

exercises became known as EXPANDED NEW HORIZONS (ENH). 

Of the approximately 22,500 RC soldiers, sailors, airmen, and 

Marines employed in EXPANDED NEW HORIZONS, most came from the 

Army reserve components.329 The RC soldiers came from over 41 states 

and 236 units (126 ARNG; 110 USAR). More than 20,500 personnel 

(12,600 ARNG; 7,700 USAR) trained in Latin America and the Caribbean. 

During ENH, they constructed 31 schools, nine clinics, one community 

center, 22 wells, and six bridges. They also repaired 175 kilometers of road 

and two dikes, and conducted 28 medical exercises.330 Engineers rechanneled a riverbed and built an emergency run-off channel.331 

Medical readiness exercises occurred at 13 locations in four 

provinces. Medical and veterinary personnel screened and treated 70,078 

patients and over 20,000 animal patients during the seven-month period of 

the exercises. The majority of human ailments involved upper respiratory 

infections, parasites, skin conditions and dental needs. Veterinary specialists 

assisted El Salvadorans in treating livestock and using better management 

practices. 

328 Information Paper, Lieutenant Colonel James Kish, NGB-ARO-Y, subject: ARNG Participation in NEW 

HORIZONS (2 Apr. 1999); see also Information Paper, Major Glenn Hagler, NGB-ARO-Y, subject: 

ARNG Participation in NEW HORIZONS (2 Apr. 1999). 

329 Briefing, Colonel Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, Overseas 

Deployment Training—ARNG & USAR Response to Hurricane Mitch/Georges – Related Relief Efforts 

(“expanded” NEW HORIZONS Exercises – ENH) (Aug. 19, 1999). 

330 Briefing, Colonel Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, Overseas 

Deployment Training—ARNG & USAR Response to Hurricane Mitch/Georges – Related Relief Efforts 

(“expanded” NEW HORIZONS Exercises – ENH) (Aug. 19, 1999). 

331 Staff Sgt. Steven R. Wolf, 561st Corps Support Group and Joint Task Force New Hope – El Salvador, 

New Horizons Exercise Wraps up in Central America - The View From Joint Task Force New Hope in El 

Salvador (revised Sep. 22, 1999, OCAR, Pentagon, Email: webmaster@ocar.army.pentagon.mil). 

148 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

Other Army Reserve soldiers deploying to Central America came 

from supply, maintenance, military police, public affairs, water purification, 

civil affairs and other combat support/combat service support units. 

Supporting this intensive activity behind the scenes were automated logistics 

specialists, mechanics, drivers, cooks, communications specialists, water 

purification specialists, military police and a bath and laundry unit.332 

Training benefits derived from the conduct of these events directly 

improve the readiness of our engineers, logisticians, communicators, 

military police, transportation elements, aviators, medical personnel and 

linguists, as well as providing a valuable tool to exercise the mobilization 

capabilities of the State Area Coordinators (STARC) staffs and Continental 

United States Army (CONUSAs).333 13,100 ARNG soldiers334 and 7,700 

Reserve soldiers assisted with Hurricane Mitch relief efforts in Guatemala 

and El Salvador during EXPANDED NEW HORIZONS.335 

It is a great idea (training in El Salvador). We get to do our 

mission and completely set up all of our equipment normally 

assigned to us, while at the same time we help the people of El 

Salvador. This is the most productive annual training I have 

ever had with this unit. I have learned more about overcoming 

problems including fixing all of our equipment. 

SFC David Roe, the rotation NCOIC, 89th RSC’s 

1013th Quartermaster Company, North Platte and 

McCook, NE.336 

332 Staff Sgt. Steven R. Wolf, 561st Corps Support Group and Joint Task Force New Hope – El Salvador, 

New Horizons Exercise Wraps up in Central America - The View From Joint Task Force New Hope in El 

Salvador (revised Sep. 22, 1999, OCAR, Pentagon, Email: webmaster@ocar.army.pentagon.mil). 

333 Information Paper, Lieutenant Colonel James Kish, NGB-ARO-Y, subject: ARNG Participation in NEW 

HORIZONS (2 Apr. 1999); see also Information Paper, Major Glenn Hagler, NGB-ARO-Y, subject: 

ARNG Participation in NEW HORIZONS (2 Apr. 1999). 

334 Information Paper, Lieutenant Colonel James Kish, NGB-ARO-Y, subject: ARNG Participation in 

NEW HORIZONS (2 Apr. 1999); see also Information Paper, Major Glenn Hagler, NGB-ARO-Y, subject: 

ARNG Participation in NEW HORIZONS (2 Apr. 1999). 

335 Briefing, Colonel Clyde Vaughn, Chief, Operations Division, Army National Guard, Overseas 

Deployment Training—ARNG & USAR Response to Hurricane Mitch/Georges – Related Relief Efforts 

(“expanded” NEW HORIZONS Exercises – ENH) (Aug. 19, 1999). 

336 Staff Sgt. Steven R. Wolf, 561st Corps Support Group and Joint Task Force New Hope – El Salvador, 

New Horizons Exercise Wraps up in Central America - The View From Joint Task Force New Hope in El 

Salvador (revised Sep. 22, 1999, OCAR, Pentagon, Email: webmaster@ocar.army.pentagon.mil). 

149 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

There were a total of seven EXPANDED NEW HORIZONS exercises 

and a Forward Command Element (FCE).337 

(1) NH Honduras-01 (NH99HO-01, 13 Feb thru 8 May 

1999, with redeployment completed 20 June 1999) (JTF 

Sula) 

This was the original exercise (JTF Lempira-NH99HO) planned for 

execution over an 18-month window. This exercise was relocated into the 

devastated Sula Valley, hence the task force name, JTF Sula. Consisting of 

soldiers from 25 ARNG units from 18 states, the majority were from South 

Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi. Their mission was to construct four 

schools, three clinics, one public latrine, and four wells, conduct three 

medical exercises, and make road improvements within their operational 

area. Nearly 3,000 ARNG soldiers were directly trained during six 

rotations. 

(2) NH Honduras-02 (NH99HO-02, 21 Feb thru 8 Aug 1999, 

with redeployment completed by 22 Aug 1999) (JTF Aguan 

Arrow) 

One of the objectives was to rapidly deploy another Task Force into 

Honduras to provide a seamless transition between the Active Forces 

deployed for the rehabilitation effort, in Phase II, and the RC forces 

deployed for the Restoration Phase. JTF Aguan deployed rapidly to the 

Aguan valley in Honduras, an area well known to thousands of RC soldiers, 

sailors, airmen and marines due to previous exercises in that area from 1985 

through 1992. This was CINCSOUTH’s highest priority add-on exercise. 

This exercise was conceived, planned, and launched in less than 60 days in 

response to General Wilhelm’s request. Louisiana and Missouri were 

selected to lead this critical effort because of their recent and vast experience 

in the region. Centered in the Aguan River valley, one of the hardest hit 

areas within Honduras, the mission focused on repair or reconstruction of 

five bridges, nine culvert crossings, and 125km of road repair, as well as 

337 Information Paper, Lieutenant Colonel James Kish, NGB-ARO-Y, subject: ARNG Participation in NEW 

HORIZONS (2 Apr. 1999); see also Information Paper, Major Glenn Hagler, NGB-ARO-Y, subject: 

ARNG Participation in NEW HORIZONS (2 Apr. 1999). 

150 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

construction of two schools, two clinics, and six wells, and conducting three 

medical exercises. Nearly 4,000 ARNG soldiers were trained as part of 

twelve rotations. 

(3) NH Guatemala 99-I (NH99GT-01, 8 Feb thru 5 Jun 

1999, with redeployment completed 16 Aug 1999) (JTF San 

Marcos) 

This was one of the original NH exercises and remained unchanged. 

The original NH exercise (JTF San Marcos) became NH Guatemala 99-I and 

was expanded into NH Guatemala 99-II (JTF Montagua). USAR had the 

lead for the Guatemala Exercises. The Guatemala Exercises consisted of a 

total of eight rotations, four during NH Guatemala 99-I and four during NH 

Guatemala 99-II (JTF Montagua). NH Guatemala 99-I consisted of 11 

projects: one base camp, three Medical Readiness Training Exercises 

(MEDRETES), two fresh water wells and five three-room schools. Eighteen 

units from nine states were involved.338 

(4) NH Guatemala 99-II (NH99GU, 15 May thru 9 Aug 

1999, with redeployment completed 16 Aug 1999) (JTF 

Montagua) 

NH Guatemala 99-II consisted of a total of four rotations and 18 

projects: one base camp upgrade, one river crossing operation, four dike 

repairs, five MEDRETES, one bridge repair, two fresh water wells and three 

three-room schools, and the construction of three low water crossings. 

Forty-eight units from 24 states and one territory were involved.339 The 

ARNG provided helicopter support (six UH-60 helicopters and crews). 

338 Briefing, U.S. Army Reserve Command (USARC) Semi-Annual Historical Report (USARC DSCOPS) 

(9 Feb. 1999) (Period Covered: 1 Jan. 1999 to 30 Jun. 1999). 

339 Briefing, U.S. Army Reserve Command (USARC) Semi-Annual Historical Report (USARC DSCOPS) 

(9 Feb. 1999) (Period Covered: 1 Jan. 1999 to 30 Jun. 1999). 

151 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(5) NH El Salvador (NH99ES, 30 Mar thru 16 Aug 1999, 

with redeployment completed 16 Aug 1999) (JTF New 

Hope) 

The ARNG provided helicopter support (three UH-1 helicopters and 

crews). USAR had the lead for the El Salvador Exercise. NH El Salvador 

consisted of 20 projects: one base camp, four culverts and/or bridges, five 

road fill projects, five MEDRETES, one potable water well and four threeroom schools. Thirty-seven units from 20 states and one territory were 

involved.340 

(6) NH Nicaragua (NH99NU, 17 Apr thru 4 Sep 1999, with 

redeployment completed XX 1999) (JTF Esteli) 

The Ohio National Guard led JTF Esteli. A total of seven states, 15 

ARNG units and over 2,000 ARNG soldiers participated. During this 

exercise the JTF constructed three school and three clinics, drilled four 

wells, and conducted five medical readiness training exercises. Originally to 

be supported by an AC element, the requirement shifted to the RC in midFebruary 1999. The ARNG was augmented by an engineer battalion from 

the USMCR for horizontal construction. The exercise provided training for 

2,300 ARNG soldiers. USAR conducted three MEDRETES (175 personnel 

during five rotations)—five units from four states, and provided an MP 

Company (70 personnel), a Quartermaster Battalion (CSB), a Quartermaster 

Detachment (water purification) and a Quartermaster Supply Company.341 

(7) NH Dominican Republic (NH99DR, 2 Apr thru 6 Aug 

1999, with redeployment completed by 20 Aug 1999) (JTF 

Caribbean Castle) 

This exercise was requested by General Wilhelm in response to the 

effects of Hurricane Georges. This exercise was conceived, planned, and 

launched in 100 days. The Alabama ARNG was selected to lead this effort. 

Mission focus was vertical construction of eight schools, replacement of a 

bridge, and the conduct of three medical exercises. The ARNG was 

340 Briefing, U.S. Army Reserve Command (USARC) Semi-Annual Historical Report (USARC DSCOPS) 

(9 Feb. 1999) (Period Covered: 1 Jan. 1999 to 30 Jun. 1999). 

341 Briefing, U.S. Army Reserve Command (USARC) Semi-Annual Historical Report (USARC DSCOPS) 

(9 Feb. 1999) (Period Covered: 1 Jan. 1999 to 30 Jun. 1999). 

152 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

augmented by an Engineer Battalion from the USMCR for the bridge 

project. Nearly 3,000 ARNG soldiers were trained during nine rotations. 

USAR conducted 2 MEDRETES and deployed 70 soldiers—four units from 

two states and one territory.342 

(8) Forward Command Element (FCE) (13 Mar thru 1 Sep 

1999, with redeployment to be completed by 20 Sep 1999) 

During Phases I and II, JTF-Aquila provided command and control 

(C2) for U.S. forces in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua. For Phase 

III, CINCSOUTH requested a RC Forward Command Element (FCE) for 

these same countries. This command cell was formed to meet the increased 

need for oversight in the Central American region due to the number and 

complexity of the exercises conducted. The Ohio ARNG had the lead and 

provided the FCE Commander, Brigadier General James Caldwell, with an 

USAR Colonel as the Deputy. A 117-person, multi-component command 

and control (C2) headquarters element, of which 100 were ARNG & USAR, 

the task force deployed on 13 March (via ANG C-130) to Soto Cano AB, 

Honduras. 

The FCE Commander reported directly to CINCSO. The focus for the 

FCE was sustained C2 over the ongoing exercises. Embedded within the 

FCE was an Army aviation section with fixed wing capability (three C-23s, 

one C-12). Staffing for the FCE was split between the RC. One Naval 

Reserve unit also deployed with the FCE. ARNG-helicopter support was 

provided to the two USAR-led exercises in Guatemala (six UH-60 

helicopters and crews) and one USAR-led exercise in El Salvador (three 

UH-1 helicopters and crews). 

2. Reserve Component-Unique Lessons Learned. 

JAs should be involved in all phases of operations, including the 

planning phase. JAs must be proactive in all six core legal disciplines. The 

experience of the JA officers deploying for the New Horizons exercises was 

that, while conscientious and proficient with the Uniform Code of Military 

Justice (UCMJ) and report of survey issues, the JAs were challenged by 

operationally unique issues. Thus USAR and ARNG JAs must ensure they 

342 Briefing, U.S. Army Reserve Command (USARC) Semi-Annual Historical Report (USARC DSCOPS) 

(9 Feb. 1999) (Period Covered: 1 Jan. 1999 to 30 Jun. 1999). 

153 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

have the training, resources, and reach back capability required in today’s 

legally complex operations. 

a. Reserve JAs will be required to provide support in all core legal 

disciplines. 343 

(1) Military Justice 

(a) The Reserve JA must be familiar with the UCMJ. 

ARNG JAs will be expected to be familiar with the UCMJ and the 

permissible punishments. As most ARNG JAs commonly deal with military 

justice under their respective state military codes, the ARNG JA needs to be 

familiar with the provisions of the UCMJ and be prepared to assist in the 

administration of a variety of military justice issues. For example, among 

the various actions which Hurricane Mitch presented were Article 15s for 

violations of Articles 89, 92, 112a, and 128.344

 (b) The Reserve JA must advise Commanders on 

military justice jurisdiction. 

The administration of military justice will cross component lines. The 

Reserve judge advocate must understand that all soldiers, when OCONUS, 

are subject to the UCMJ and military discipline may be imposed by the 

commanding officer, whether National Guard, Reserve or Active. The 

Reserve JA must be prepared to advise commanders regarding the extent of 

their authority for military justice issues. Commanders, whether Reserve or 

Active, may not be aware that they have jurisdiction over soldiers within the 

chain of command. The extent of UCMJ authority was not clearly defined 

and identified for the FCE commander or the various TF commanders. 

343 See DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS (1 Mar. 2000). The 

six core legal disciplines are administrative law, civil law, claims, international law, legal assistance and 

military justice. The three legal functional areas are command and control, sustainment, and personnel 

service support (or support, for short). The practice of operational law consists of legal services that 

directly affect the command and control and sustainment of an operation. 

344 Email Message from Colonel John Brant, Ohio Army National Guard, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon W. 

Schukei, Director, Domestic Operations Law, CLAMO, subject: AAR TF-Esteli (9 Mar. 2000 9:44 p.m.) 

(on file with CLAMO). 

154 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

Lack of understanding of jurisdictional authorities could lead to a 

number of individuals avoiding appropriate disciplinary action. Significant 

confusion existed in this area until late in the operation.345 For example, an 

ARNG Commander was under the impression that he was not allowed to 

take any military justice action, including imposition of non-judicial 

punishment (“Article 15s”), against any active duty or USAR soldiers under 

his command.346 After conducting further research, the JA advised the 

Commander that he had military justice jurisdiction over any soldier under 

his command. 

Further complicating military justice issues will be the deployment 

orders for personnel. Some personnel reported with orders indicating they 

were attached to USARSO for UCMJ and administrative action requiring 

approval by a convening authority.347 The JA may also have to address 

claims of non-jurisdiction by other Services. As an example, several Marine 

detachment commanders, whose units were serving in the task forces, 

asserted exemption from UCMJ authority of the TF commanders.348 

(c) The Reserve JA should be aware of any authority 

that has been withheld from the Commanders. 

Commanders may not be aware that their authority to impose military 

justice has been withheld by a higher authority. In one instance, a 

Commander wanted to administer a summary court-martial to a soldier for 

345 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

346 Memorandum from Colonel Thomas G. Schumacher, HQ STARC, Ohio Army National Guard, to 

Lieutenant Colnel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: JAG Support 

in Nicaragua 1999 (attachment to Email Message from Colonel Thomas Schumacher, Ohio Army National 

Guard, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon W. Schukei, Director, Domestic Operations Law, CLAMO, subject: 

JAG Involvement in Nicaragua – 1999 (24 Feb. 2000 9:16 a.m.) (on file with CLAMO). 

347 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

348 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

155 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

ordering the dispatch of a deadlined vehicle.349 The truck had been 

deadlined because it had no brakes. The truck was being driven from the 

base camp at San Ramon to the construction site at Plantanares, when the 

brakes failed as the truck was going down a mountain road and overturned. 

The JA assisted in interviewing soldiers, one of whom was the dispatcher. 

The commander did not have the authority to refer the case. SOUTHCOM 

had withheld summary court-martial jurisdiction, but the Commander was 

not aware of this. 

(2) Administrative and Civil Law 

As the only available legal adviser, the Reserve JA can expect to 

address a variety of issues. Personnel issues are common. The JA may also 

be expected to address a variety of administrative law issues, such as MWR 

operations.350 

As addressed in Section D. Fiscal Law, fiscal law and procurement 

issues are a significant and frequent area of concern for deployed JAs. Often 

Reserve JAs are not familiar with these issues.351 An indication of the 

importance of the issue is the large number of ratification actions initiated 

and processed prior to return to home station.352 Among the fiscal 

law/procurement issues, the JA may face non-competitive awards, conflicts 

of interests, such as contract awards to family members, and ratification 

actions.353 The JA may also be requested to review contract files to identify 

349 Memorandum from Colonel Thomas G. Schumacher, HQ STARC, Ohio Army National Guard, to 

Lieutenant Colnel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: JAG Support 

in Nicaragua 1999 (attachment to Email Message from Colonel Thomas Schumacher, Ohio Army National 

Guard, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon W. Schukei, Director, Domestic Operations Law, CLAMO, subject: 

JAG Involvement in Nicaragua – 1999 (24 Feb. 2000 9:16 a.m.) (on file with CLAMO). 

350 Email Message from Colonel John Brant, Ohio Army National Guard, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon 

W. Schukei, Director, Domestic Operations Law, CLAMO, subject: AAR TF-Esteli (9 Mar. 2000 9:44 

p.m.) (on file with CLAMO). 

351 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

352 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

353 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

156 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH, 1998-1999
 

remaining tasks and to compile a list of purchased materials.354 Fiscal and 

procurement issues continue at home station as each task force closes out 

their contracts and accounts.355 

Judge advocates must proactively monitor land use agreements and 

leases. See Section G.3. Real Estate. As the New Horizons operation began 

to wind down, the FCE required each task force to turn in documents for 

inclusion into the master archives. Among the requested documents were 

copies of land use agreements for the various projects.356 Unfortunately, few 

land use agreements had been negotiated and reduced to writing. 

Apparently there was no JA involvement in initial land use issues.357 

(3) Legal Assistance 

Legal assistance issues for RC soldiers are varied, but likely to be of a 

recurring nature. Reemployment and Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act 

(SSCRA) issues are sure to surface. RC JAs should be become familiar with 

the SSCRA. For example, soldiers can typically experience reemployment 

problems, child support problems, and termination of apartment leases 

because of military service commitments.358 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

354 Email Message from Colonel John Brant, Ohio Army National Guard, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon W. 

Schukei, Director, Domestic Operations Law, CLAMO, subject: AAR TF-Esteli (9 Mar. 2000 9:44 p.m.) 

(on file with CLAMO). 

355 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

356 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

357 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

358 Email Message from Colonel John Brant, Ohio Army National Guard, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon 

W. Schukei, Director, Domestic Operations Law, CLAMO, subject: AAR TF-Esteli (9 Mar. 2000 9:44 

p.m.) (on file with CLAMO). 

157 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

b. Logs and continuity files are essential for JA transitions. 

The Reserve JA may be isolated and without the opportunity for an 

adequate briefing on issues in the deployed area. It is not unusual for a unit 

to be without a legal advisor, and the Reserve JA should be prepared to 

arrive without any overlap in legal services. The JA should also be prepared 

to address more than one core legal discipline. Military justice may be only 

one of a number of varied issues, and the Reserve JA can expect to assist in 

a manner similar to a general practice of military law. As an illustration, the 

JA support at the FCE at Soto Cano Air Base, Honduras, was not 

continuous. Due to a one-month gap between JAs, there was no transition 

between the incoming and outgoing JAs.359 Therefore good logs and 

continuity files are essential to seamless transition of legal services. 

c. Summanry. 

Reserve Component JAs deploy frequently, and their contributions are 

extensive. When deployed, they can expect to operate in legally complex 

environments. RC JAs must train in all six core legal disciplines360 and be 

familiar with both RC and AC issues if they are to be prepared for 

deployment. 

359 Memorandum from Lieutenant Colonel B. Kevin Bennett, Ohio Army National Guard, AGOH-HROLR, to Lieutenant Colonel Gordon Schukei, Director for Domestic Operations, JAG School, subject: After 

Action Report, Operation New Horizons, Forward Command Element Legal Operations (7 Mar. 2000) (on 

file with CLAMO). 

360 DEP’T OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL 27-100, LEGAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS, par. 4.4.2 (1 Mar. 2000). 

158 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDICES
 

159 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

160 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX INTRO-1: EFFECTS OF HURRICANE MITCH 

Appendix Intro-1 161 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX INTRO-2: DEPLOYMENT ORDER 

162 Appendix Intro-2 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix Intro-2 163 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

164 Appendix Intro-2 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix Intro-2 165 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

166 Appendix Intro-2 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX INTRO-3: DEPLOYMENT ORDER MODIFICATION 

Appendix Intro-3 167 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

168 Appendix Intro-3 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix Intro-3 169 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX INTRO-4: DEPLOYMENT ORDER MODIFICATION 02 

170 Appendix Intro-4 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix Intro-4 171 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

172 Appendix Intro-4 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix Intro-4 173 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

174 Appendix Intro-4 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix Intro-4 175 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

176 Appendix Intro-4 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX INTRO-5: SECRETARY OF DEFENSE MEMORANDUM, 

SUBJECT: FUNDING ENHANCED NEW HORIZONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA 

AND THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 

Appendix Intro-5 177 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX INTRO-6: PRESS BRIEFING BY SECRETARY OF THE ARMY 

LOUIS CALDERA AND COMMANDER AND CHIEF OF SOUTHERN 

COMMAND GENERAL CHARLES WILHELM 

THE WHITE HOUSE
 

Office of the Press Secretary
 

(Tegucigalpa, Honduras)
 

For Immediate March 9, 1999 Release 

PRESS BRIEFING BY
 

SECRETARY OF ARMY LOUIS CALDERA
 

AND COMMANDER AND CHIEF OF SOUTHERN COMMAND
 

GENERAL CHARLES WILHELM
 

Hotel Maya
 

Tegucigalpa, Honduras
 

2:35 P.M. (L) 

MR. HAMMER: Good afternoon. Thank you for coming. Today we are 

going to be having a briefing by Secretary of the Army, Louis Caldera; and 

Commander in Chief of Southern Command, General Wilhelm. They will 

be focusing on the military -- the U.S. military's efforts in direct response to 

Hurricane Mitch, the initial immediate assistance that was provided and 

also the reconstruction that is still ongoing. 

So now, Secretary. 

SECRETARY CALDERA: I'm Louis Caldera, Secretary of the Army. 

Immediately after Hurricane Mitch occurred, the Secretary of Defense, Bill 

Cohen, asked me to come down as his personal representative, to look at 

the efforts that the U.S. military was doing, to make sure that General 

Wilhelm had all the support and all the resources in the Pentagon to help 

support this mission. 

This is my third trip down here to Central America, a tremendous 

difference from when I came on that first trip early in November -­

everything was still flooded and you could see long stretches of road. But 

there were no cars on the road because eventually the road would end up 

178 Appendix Intro-6 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

into a bridge that had been washed away. Today, as General Wilhelm will 

tell you, so many of those bridges have been rebuilt and the country 

reconnected, so that commerce and movement of people and goods to 

jobs can begin again. 

The President today -- I want to just reemphasize two of the things that he 

said, that General Wilhelm will cover: one, the tremendous contribution 

that U.S. service members have made here. Close to 6,000 active duty 

components, service members from all of the services were here from the 

very initial life-saving phase to the transition phase. And more will be 

coming over the next several months. 

One of the things that the President announced today was that Operation 

New Horizons, which is our National Guard training effort, will bring some 

20,000 National Guardsmen and Reserve soldiers between now -- some 

of them have already arrived -- and August of this year, to all of the 

countries here in Central America to continue the outreach effort. That's a 

tripling of the size of the project that we had already envisioned -- even 

before the hurricane had occurred. 

He also announced today, in recognition of the tremendous job that our 

service members had made, that the Humanitarian Service Award would 

be given to every service member who participated in this mission -- a 

mission which now, in his words, is the largest humanitarian mission the 

United States has been involved in since the Berlin Airlift. 

Today, our country has committed some quarter of a billion dollars of 

resources, just through the Department of Defense, through those active 

duty and Reserve component service members, to support our neighbors 

here in Central America. That was tremendously appreciated by the 

people here, working hand in hand with the Honduran military and civil 

agencies to make sure that that assistance gets to where it is most greatly 

needed. 

With that, I'd like to introduce the Commander in Chief for Southern 

Command, who's been responsible for overseeing this operation, General 

Charlie Wilhelm. 

GENERAL WILHELM: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is 

General Charlie Wilhelm and I am the Commander in Chief of the United 

States Southern Command. I'd like to take just a couple of minutes to 

briefly review with you the activities that the Department of Defense has 

been engaged in, is engaged in, and will conduct over the balance of the 

fiscal year to help the four nations of Central America recover from the 

damages that were brought by Hurricane Mitch. 

I would start first by scoping the disaster itself. You may be in possession 

of these figures and statistics already, but I'll try to perhaps relate them in 

Appendix Intro-6 179 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

an historic context in the ways that I try to explain them in the United 

States. 

First of all, as I think you're aware, the National Weather Service has 

categorized this as the most destructive storm to hit Central America in 

more than 200 years. At this moment, we count more than 8,200 dead in 

Central America, and more than 9,300 missing. Now that four months 

have elapsed, there's very little hope for those 9,000 plus who are 

unaccounted for. So, in historic context, that's 17,000 lives lost, which is 

equal to the total United States losses during the Korean War. 

I think it's also meaningful to note that this was a storm that caused 

devastation over a very large area. Just two weeks ago, we looked to a 

tragic set of circumstances in Colombia when the earthquake struck near 

Perrera (phonetic) and near Armenia (phonetic). One thousand lives were 

lost there, 3,000 people injured, and it had an undeniable economic 

impact on a small part of Colombia. There is where we encountered the 

difference. 

This storm -- and this is based on our imagery systems, which enable us 

to really gauge the magnitude of the damage -- affected 40 percent of the 

landmass of these four nations, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras, and El 

Salvador. So it was a very, very wide-reaching calamity. 

What did we do about it? We put together an operation which we have 

conducted in three phases. We termed these phases, first, the emergency 

phase, which began on the 26th of October when the storm first settled 

over the Bay Islands just north of Honduras; and that phase ran for 

roughly 30 days through about Thanksgiving, and we termed that the 

emergency phase of our operations. 

The objective during the emergency phase was first to save lives. And I'll 

return to that in a minute. And then second, it was to get the necessities of 

life -- food, clothing and shelter -- to stranded elements of the population 

of the four countries who were cut off from the capitals and from other 

sources of aid by the loss of road networks and bridges. 

I mentioned lives saved. During the early days of the disaster, our people 

saved 1,052 lives. That begs the question, how can you be that specific? 

Those numbers are compiled from the mission reports that were filed by 

our helicopter pilots and by members of our Special Operations forces 

who flew in on Blackhawk helicopters and, in a very few words, put the 

tires down on those last few meters of dry land before a combination of a 

coastal surge from the ocean and runoff from the mountains swept whole 

families under water. 

Also, we put Zodiac rubber boats in the northern portions of Honduras, 

and they literally motored from rooftop to rooftop, pulling families off of 

180 Appendix Intro-6 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

those last pieces of high ground and delivering them to safe havens, 

places where the waters wouldn't reach them. 

I have been told that the rainfall in some places was 84 inches in five days 

-- 7 feet in five days. So the magnitude of the flooding was enormous. 

During those first 30 days, we delivered over 3.75 million pounds of food 

throughout Central America to isolated communities; 65 tons of medical 

supplies; and over 120,000 gallons of potable water. As I have pointed out 

frequently, the whole issue of water is a very important one. The storm 

and the high waters and the flooding claimed 17,000 lives. As soon as the 

waters began to recede, our attention immediately refocused on the 

aftermath of the storm and all the foul wells and the contaminated water. 

And we feared outbreaks of epidemic proportions of typhus and cholera. 

So we worked very hard to get fresh water to the people. 

Little anecdotes are sometimes helpful to understand precisely what we 

did. I recall on a Saturday morning, after having conducted one of my first 

visits here, in early November, making a short presentation in Miami, 

trying to generate some support in the United States for what was going 

on here, and I got a call from President Carter. President Carter had just 

visited the region, and when I returned his call he said, you know, we must 

do something about the dirty water and those little plastic bottles are not 

going to get the job done. What can we get to the people of Central 

America so that they can purify their own water? 

Thinking back many years ago, when I was a young lieutenant in Vietnam, 

I remembered taking two iodine tablets, putting them in a canteen of 

water, shaking it up and then letting it sit for about 30 minutes. It tasted 

horrible, but the water did not make you sick. The bottom line of this little 

anecdote is that within 36 hours, we had 70 percent of the national 

inventory of iodine tablets in the United States en route to Central 

America. 

So through a few selective statistics and one or two anecdotes, that was 

phase one, the emergency phase. 

The second phase of our operation we termed the rehabilitation phase. 

And in very simple terms, during the rehabilitation phase what we sought 

to do was to make quick fixes to the infrastructure throughout Central 

America so that the nations could start to tend to the essential health and 

welfare needs of their populations themselves. During this phase of the 

operation, our troop strength peaked and at about Christmas, which is a 

good benchmark date, we had about 5,900 troops on the ground here in 

Central America, providing a wide range of service and assistance 

functions for the population. 

Appendix Intro-6 181 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

You may recall that when the First Lady visited in early December she 

forecasted 5,700, so she was very, very close to our final peak strength. 

During that phase of the operations, and I should say during this phase of 

the operations because we are just on the verge of concluding it, we 

undertook 67 major engineer projects throughout the region. By and large, 

these involved the rehabilitation and restoration of roads and bridges; we 

reclaimed well over 100 wells, cleansing them, resleeving them, and 

making them suitable sources of drinking water. We built several clinics 

from the ground floor up where medical treatment facilities were lost, 

which serviced entire segments of the population. And the President just 

visited the Juan Ramon Molina Bridge here in Tegucigalpa. That was one 

of four very large bridges that we put in in Honduras, and that bridge had 

to be replaced to reunite the two sides of Tegucigalpa, the capital city. 

We are standing now on the verge, or not -- really not on the verge, we've 

actually commenced phase three of the Department's involvement in the 

Central American recovery undertaking. And as Secretary Caldera 

mentioned, this is where we really have a changing of the guard, in a 

manner of speaking. The active component forces who have been heavily 

involved in the emergency and rehabilitation phase are now being 

replaced by Guardsmen and Reservists. As the Secretary mentioned, 

between now and over the summer, we will deploy over 

members of the Guard and Reserve, and they will build a total of 33 

schools, 12 clinics. They will repair 52 more roads and bridges. They will 

drill 27 high capacity wells. And very importantly, they will conduct 40 very 

large medical outreach programs during which we expect that we will 

establish somewhere between 70,000 and 100,000 patient contacts. 

This exercise is significant for two reasons. First, this is the premier 

training event of the year for our Guardsmen and reservists. And 

secondly, the work that our engineers, medics, and logisticians do will 

remain long after they leave, benefitting the populations of these four 

countries. 

I might add that those 23,000 Guardsmen and Reservists come from 45 

states. So, essentially, the entire continental United States will become 

involved in the recovery operations here in Central America. 

Normally I do this with some charts. Unfortunately, they didn't make it here 

today. But I think I've given you some of the little data bits which might 

prove interesting and probably do as good a job as anything else I could 

say of really kind of scoping the effort here in Central America. 

Thank you for your attention. And I suspect the Secretary and I will take 

questions now. 

182 Appendix Intro-6 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Q General, could I ask you a question about the aid? President Clinton 

keeps talking about the $900 million that he is asking for. What in that 

package would play into what you want to get done in this last phase? 

GENERAL WILHELM: The total defense commitment -- this last phase 

has a price tag of $70.3 million; $56 million of that is for the deployment 

and redeployment of the forces and to provide the wherewithal, the 

materials to 

construct all of these projects. And we have also requested $14.3 million 

to pay Guard and Reserve pay and allowances. Overall, the Department 

has invested $215.3 million in these undertakings throughout Central 

America. 

Q Will you be crippled without this new appropriation that apparently is 

emergency money, but it's not being passed with any kind of speed? 

GENERAL WILHELM: I would certainly offer the observation that the 

quicker we can get reimbursed the better. We have the green light. The 

President has approved these operations. I should say there are over 

1,100 people in country right now. School walls and clinic walls are going 

up as we speak. Those are Guardsmen from Louisiana and from South 

Carolina. There are contingents rolling in from Missouri right now to 

replace them. So we're underway, but, yes, the supplemental will be most 

welcome and very obviously, the sooner the better. 

Q How did President Clinton ask for your airplane today? Did he use your 

aircraft? 

GENERAL WILHELM: No. Those are -- I think those are from Air Mobility 

Command and from the 89th Special Airlift Wing. 

Q We were told that was your aircraft, that he flew into the base in. 

GENERAL WILHELM: No, ma'am. No, ma'am. Not mine. I don't have one. 

(Laughter.) 

Q It's a great looking plane -- you should ask for one. (Laughter.) 

GENERAL WILHELM: Thank you. I will. What's your name, I'll -­

(laughter.) 

Q General, what was the role of Soto Cano during the 1980s in 

prosecuting -- or in assisting operations against leftist insurgencies in 

Central America? 

GENERAL WILHELM: Thanks. As I think many of you know, we have had 

a continuous United States presence in Honduras at the Soto Cano Air 

Base, since 1983. I would hasten to clarify that that is not a U.S. base. It is 

Appendix Intro-6 183 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

a Honduran Air Force Base and it is also the home of their Air Force 

Academy. So we are guests of the Honduran Air Force there. 

As you correctly point out, during the decade of the '80s that was a base 

which supported our activities against the insurgencies throughout Central 

America. Now the forces there have been re-roled and they support the 

regional engagement activities of Southern Command throughout Central 

America -- everything from counternarcotics operations to the annual New 

Horizons exercise program, which is underway now. 

So these are largely civil military operations and the training events that 

we conduct with the militaries of Central America to assist them along the 

road toward assuming their rightful role in a democracy. So Soto Cano is 

very important to us. 

Q One other factual question. You said that at its peak, the U.S. military 

troops involved in relief work here were 5,900. Roughly, how many are 

here today? 

GENERAL WILHELM: We are down -- what I refer to as the phase two 

force, the active component -- there were 49 Marines at the bridge this 

morning who will be leaving on Friday. And then we have -- our normal 

component at Soto Cano, is 499. That is a precise number, with a few 

additional. 

But, again, the force and numbers now are the Guard and Reserve and 

there are between 1,100 and 1,200 Guardsmen on the ground today. So, 

1,100 plus 500 plus the 50 Marines who are preparing to leave. 

SECRETARY CALDERA: Let me underscore how important it was for us 

to have those soldiers at Soto Cano. There were 500, approximately 500 

who are permanently stationed there -- that is what their place of duty is. 

And when the hurricane first came through, of course, they were hit by the 

hurricane. As it moved on they were able to immediately get their 

helicopters up in the air and move toward the northern part of the country, 

where the hurricane had already passed through, to begin that operation 

of starting to save lives. 

There were other parts of Honduras where they could not fly to because 

the hurricane was still there and they could not fly toward Guatemala. But 

it gave them that ability to immediately begin that life-saving process. And 

in those early days, frankly, what I was hearing was, why can't we get 

more helicopters there sooner? 

Because they're so critical to getting out to those remote locations that 

could not be reached by any other way other than by helicopter -- both in 

pushing out emergency supplies, in saving lives of people from high-rising 

waters, and in medivacking out individuals who had been severely injured 

and needed desperately to have medical attention for their wounds. For 

184 Appendix Intro-6 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

those same helicopters that were pushing out emergency supplies and 

plastic sheeting for the 3 million people who had lost their homes, could 

then use the same helicopter to bring back individuals who needed to be 

medivacked out. 

So it was very critical to the response to this disaster. It certainly is critical 

to our engagement strategy with all of the democracies that exist here in 

Latin America and South America and with the very important mission that 

we all share in counternarcotics that is so important to our country, as 

well. 

Q General, you all gave a pretty complete timeline of the things that the 

military did, day by day. I was a little curious if on Saturday, October 31st, 

you all rescued President Flores? Can you jog my memory here? I don't 

recall the details. 

GENERAL WILHELM: Well, the facts, as best I know them, was that both 

President Flores and Mrs. Mary Flores, his wife, had left Tegucigalpa and 

had gone into some stricken areas of the country. At this time the water 

was still rising, this was 31 October -- the rains hadn't even stopped. As I 

understand it, they found themselves cut off from both sides by rising 

water. And a Blackhawk helicopter went in and pulled the President and 

Mrs. Flores out and took them back to Tegucigalpa. As you know, it was a 

very tough time. The Mayor of Tegucigalpa, who was a much beloved 

man, was tragically killed in a helicopter crash trying to visit some of his 

constituents in and around the city. So to have lost the President at the 

same time would have been doubly tragic. 

Q General, do you find that engaging in rescue and relief operations in 

any way diminishes the capacity of your personnel to serve and to mount 

that operation? GENERAL WILHELM: No, not at all. If you look at the 

forces that are here right now, these are principally engineers, they're 

medics, they're military policemen, and these are flight crews. Some of the 

flying, because of marginal weather -- which normally associates itself with 

these kinds of disasters -- that's a stressing experience for the air crews. 

Going into what we call confined area landing sites -- CALS -- which is 

precisely what I was talking about, that last meter of dry land and that 

rooftop. Those are very demanding missions. 

So, no, it doesn't blunt their combat edge at all. And then for the combat 

service support troops who are doing the construction, this is their 

mainstream business and line of work. So, no -- if anything, we're 

sharpening the edge here. 

Q I just wanted to find out what the extent of anti-narcotics activity is going 

on in -­

Appendix Intro-6 185 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

GENERAL WILHELM: Yes. In fact, today, we're involved in an operation 

which covers all of Central America, which we refer to as Central Skies. 

Central Skies actually staged out of Soto Cano, and during this operation 

it's not an exercise, it's an operation -- the United States is providing 

tactical transportation assets -- helicopters -- to support the movement by 

drug and law enforcement officials from all of the nations of Central 

America, helping them to get to key points where they can interdict this 

flow of drugs, perhaps hit warehousing areas. So Soto Cano was a very, 

very important center for that. And the first phase of that operation was a 

training period where we acquainted the host nation DLEAs -- the drug law 

enforcement agencies -- with our mobility procedures and how they would 

actually function in and around our aircraft. So, again, Soto Cano, as the 

Secretary pointed out, was very central to that effort. 

Q Is the training over, the operation -­

GENERAL WILHELM: The training is over and the operation has begun, 

and it is rotating through the nations of Central America right now. 

MR. HAMMER: Thank you. That's all the time we have today. Thank you, 

Mr. Secretary. Thank you, General. 

186 Appendix Intro-6 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

F A C T S H E E T 

APPENDIX INTRO-7: WHITE HOUSE FACT SHEET 

HURRICANE MITCH:
 

The United States Responds to Central America
 

February 16, 1999 

Following their visits to Central America in the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch, the First 

Lady and Mrs. Gore today announced the President's supplemental package of nearly 

$1 billion in emergency disaster assistance. The supplemental package, which was 

developed in close bipartisan consultation with the Congress, will be directed primarily 

to help the Central American nations cope and rebuild after Hurricane Mitch, the 

worst natural disaster in their history. 

The United States responded immediately after the Hurricane hit late last October, 

and has continued to maintain these efforts in the months that have followed. To date, 

the United States has already provided $300 million in aid. U.S. military and civilian 

agencies have played a critical role, working with the governments of Honduras, 

Nicaragua, El Salvador and Costa Rica and a number of international and local nongovernmental organizations to help provide food, water and relief supplies; to 

distribute seeds and tools; to repair water systems and road and bridge networks; and 

to provide medical assistance. 

Key components of U.S. assistance to date are: 

RELIEF 

In the immediate aftermath of the hurricane, President Clinton directed personnel and 

resources from the military and civilian agencies of the U.S. government to support 

relief and rehabilitation efforts in Central America. 

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) 

USAID has provided almost $92 million in food and other relief assistance. 

On February 11, USAID provided $4.1 million to the International Organization for 

Migration to construct and administer ten transitional shelters for displaced people in 

Honduras. This assistance will provide alternative shelter to an estimated 25,000 

people living temporarily in schools, allowing the schools to open by March 1. 

This new assistance is in addition to $30 million from USAID's Office of Foreign 

Disaster Assistance to provide health care, repair water and sanitation systems, 

restore agricultural production and support road rehabilitation activities. The funds 

were also used to transport and deliver a variety of relief commodities including 

shelter materials, water containers and blankets. 

USAID has provided $52 million in food aid, meeting 50 percent of the overall food 

needs. Under the PL 480 Title II food aid program, USAID's Office of Food for Peace 

(FFP) will provide 60,000 metric tons of food to 800,000 Hondurans through next 

summer, 19,700 metric tons of food to 300,000 Nicaraguans for six months and 7,600 

metric tons of food for 60,000 Guatemalans for six months. The total food allocation 

also includes a $1 million contribution to the World Food Program's appeal for El 

Salvador. 

A grant of $5 million has helped revitalize small businesses impacted by the hurricane. 

Appendix Intro-7 187 
CENTER FOR L AW AND MILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Joined with a $12 million contribution from the Inter-American Development Bank, 

these funds will rebuild workplaces, reestablish inventories and generate employment. 

U.S. Department of Defense 

The Department of Defense has spent nearly $150 million to support relief and 

rehabilitation efforts in Central America. 

At the height of the relief effort, 5,300 military personnel were in Central America, 

representing the four armed services and their reserve components. Today, Joint 

Task Force Commanders in Honduras and El Salvador remain active in the region, 

coordinating the U.S. military response. U.S. Active Duty, Reserve and National 

Guard forces will be present in Central America through September to build schools 

and clinics, drill wells and repair additional roads and bridges, as part of an engineer 

and medical field training exercise called New Horizons. 

Military personnel rescued more than one thousand people trapped by flood waters 

and provided medical care and immunizations to over 35,000 people. They cleared 

major roads and bypasses, as well as erecting prefabricated bridges. Military 

personnel also repaired medical clinics and schools, and provided communities with 

safe drinking water by building wells. 

Military aircraft, including 53 helicopters were deployed throughout the region to assist 

distribution and delivered more than 3.2 million pounds of food and more than 

500,000 gallons of water. 

DoD transported to the region almost 8 million pounds of food, clothing, medicine and 

other relief items donated by American citizens. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

USDA is providing food aid and concessional loans, valued at $63 million. 

USDA is delivering 120,000 metric tons of wheat for Honduras and Nicaragua, 60,000 

metric tons of wheat for Guatemala and El Salvador and 50,000 metric tons of corn for 

the four countries. It will also provide $20 million in grants to Honduras and Nicaragua 

for the purchase of beans, vegetable oil, rice, and other basic commodities; and $10 

million in Title I concessional loans for food purchases for El Salvador and Guatemala. 

RECONSTRUCTION 

USAID has already identified an initial $120 million within its own budget to support 

reconstruction efforts in Central America by reprogramming existing food and other 

funding and reallocating recently appropriated fiscal year 1999 assistance. These 

funds will help rehabilitate transportation infrastructure, restore public utilities, support 

health care, reestablish crop and livestock production and revitalize the economic 

sector. Of this, USAID will channel $66.6 million to programs in Honduras, $32.4 

million for reconstruction in Nicaragua, $16.0 million for El Salvador and $5 million for 

Guatemala. USAID has also engaged with the private sector to leverage contributions 

and investments in Central America reconstruction. In total, more than one dozen 

Cabinet agencies will be involved in the relief efforts: for example, the Department of 

Health and Human Services will continue to take active measures to advance public 

health, and the Department of Agriculture will assist with farming recovery and land 

use planning. 

DEBT RELIEF 

The International Monetary Fund has estimated that the external financing needs of 

188 Appendix Intro-7 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Honduras and Nicaragua -- the two nations hardest hit by Hurricane Mitch -- will be 

approximately $1.4 billion over the next several years. Assisting these countries in 

filling this gap is essential to their recovery. Steps to do so include: 

The United States. and other creditor nations will relieve Honduras and Nicaragua 

from debt service obligations until 2001. The United States will urge other creditors to 

provide similar relief. 

The Administration expects that the international financial institutions will also 

contribute substantial amounts to help meet external financing needs, as will the 

World Bank-managed Central American Emergency Trust Fund. The Administration 

will work with Congress to provide a significant contribution to this trust fund. 

Combined, these efforts could provide more than $1.5 billion in debt relief. In addition, 

U.S. agencies will work with major donors and lending institutions to provide debt 

forgiveness of up to 67% of eligible debt for Honduras and up to 90% for Nicaragua. 

TRADE 

On February 10, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and Citibank signed a 

$200 million loan facility for Central America and the Caribbean. Under this initiative, 

Citibank will extend medium and long-term loans to small and medium size 

businesses in the region. In addition to the Administration's Caribbean Basin Initiative 

enhancement proposal , the United States plans to submit to the Senate bilateral 

investment treaties with Nicaragua and Honduras. 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/search?NS-search-page=document&NS-rel-docname=/WH/New/centralam/fsheet1.html&NS-query=Hurricane+Mitch&NSsearch-type=NS-boolean-query&NS-collection=Entire%20Web%20Site&NSdocs-found=60&NS-doc-number=5 

Appendix Intro-7 189 
Honduras

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX INTRO-8: COUNTRY INFORMATION - HONDURAS 

The following general information is provided on the country of Honduras:1 

Honduras is a constitutional democracy, with a president and a unicameral 

congress elected for 4-year terms. President Carlos Flores Facusse took office 

on January 27, 1998, as the fifth democratically elected President since the 

reestablishment of democracy in 1982. The two major political parties, the 

Liberals and the Nationalists, have alternated in power peacefully after free 

elections. The judiciary is independent but is often ineffective and subject to 

outside influence. 

The Honduran Armed Forces (HOAF) comprise the army, the air force, 

and the navy. The Congress in 1996 ratified a constitutional amendment to 

sever the Public Security Force (FUSEP), a paramilitary police force, from the 

HOAF. The police were transferred to civilian control in 1997; new legislation 

concerning how the civilian police force will function is expected to be approved 

in 1998. The armed forces operate with considerable institutional and legal 

autonomy, particularly in the realms of internal security and military affairs. The 

Government in 1993 established an Ad Hoc Commission on Police and Judicial 

Reform in response to credible allegations of extrajudicial killings by members of 

the FUSEP, particularly its National Directorate of Investigations (DNI). That 

decision led the Government to establish a new Public (Justice) Ministry charged 

with administering a new Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DIC) to succeed 

the DNI. Human rights organizations, including the Government's National 

Commissioner for Human Rights, acknowledge that reports of human rights 

abuses have steadily declined since the DNI was abolished; however, members 

of both the armed forces and the police continue to commit abuses. 

The economy is based primarily on agriculture, with a small but 

increasingly important maquiladora (in-bond processing for export) industry that 

accounts for some 90,000 jobs. The armed forces play a role in the national 

economy through their pension fund, controlling some enterprises usually 

associated with the private sector, including a bank, several insurance 

companies, and one of two cement companies. However, some state 

enterprises, such as the merchant marine and the national telephone company, 

have passed from military to civilian control. Approximately 43 percent of 

workers engage in agriculture; about one-third of those work on large plantations. 

1

 U.S. Department of State, Honduras Report on Human Rights Practices for 1997, released by the Bureau 

of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, January 30, 1998.  ̨. 

190 Appendix Intro-8 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

The principal export crops are coffee and bananas, which are the leading 

sources of foreign exchange; nontraditional products, such as melons and 

shrimp, also play an increasingly important role in the economy. Annual per 

capita income is about $700; the Government estimates that 65 percent of its 

citizens live in poverty. 

Appendix Intro-8 191 
Guatemala

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX INTRO-9: COUNTRY INFORMATION - GUATEMALA 

The following general information is provided on the country of 

Guatemala:1 

Guatemala is a democratic republic with separation of government powers 

and a centralized national administration. The 1985 Constitution provides for 

election by universal suffrage of a one-term president and a unicameral 

congress. It also mandates a Human Rights Ombudsman (PDH), who is elected 

by and reports to the Congress. In the November 1995 elections for president, 

vice president, congress, and municipal offices, the National Advancement Party 

(PAN) won 42 of the 80 congressional seats; however, no presidential candidate 

received an absolute majority of the votes. Alvaro Arzu Irigoyen of the PAN won 

the runoff presidential election and took office in January 1996. Reflecting a 

greater opening for political activity, 24 parties, including a broad front coalition 

composed of civic, human rights, and labor leaders, campaigned in the free and 

fair elections. The judiciary is independent, but suffers from inefficiency and 

corruption. 

The Arzu administration ended 36 years of internal conflict by signing a 

comprehensive peace agreement with the Guatemalan National Revolutionary 

Unity (URNG) guerrillas on December 29, 1996. Implementation of the Peace 

Accords began almost immediately: Demobilization of the URNG guerrillas was 

completed in May, the Mobile Military Police (PMA) were disbanded ahead of 

schedule, and the Government reduced the size of the military forces. As called 

for in the accords, the Government proposed and Congress enacted a wideranging series of legal reforms to protect human rights, strengthen civilian control 

of the military, address discrimination against the indigenous population, and lay 

the groundwork for further political and socioeconomic reforms. In the wake of 

the final Peace Accords, the mandate of the U.N. Human Rights Verification 

Mission (MINUGUA), established in November 1994 to monitor compliance with 

the Government-URNG human rights accord, was expanded to include peace 

implementation issues. The December 1996 National Reconciliation Law, which 

provided amnesty for some acts related to the internal conflict, has been narrowly 

interpreted by the courts and its constitutionality was upheld on October 8. 

1 U.S. Department of State, Guatemala Report on Human Rights Practices for 1997, released by 

the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, January 30, 1998.  ̨. 

192 Appendix Intro-9 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

The Minister of Government oversees the National Civilian Police (PNC) 

created in January under the terms of the Peace Accords, which has sole 

responsibility for internal security. There are no active members of the military in 

the police command structure, but President Arzu ordered the army to support 

the police in response to public concern about a nationwide wave of violent 

crime. The Presidential Military Staff (EMP) continued to exercise a lawenforcement role. Some members of the police and security forces committed 

human rights violations. 

The agricultural-based, private sector-oriented economy grew by 

approximately 5.0 percent in real terms. Coffee, sugar, and bananas are the 

leading exports, and more than half the work force is engaged in agriculture. 

Inflation was about 9 percent in 1996. There is a marked disparity in income 

distribution, and poverty is pervasive, particularly in the large indigenous 

community. According to U.N. statistics, approximately 80 percent of the citizens 

live in poverty, with 59 percent in extreme poverty. Per capita gross national 

product was approximately $1,450 in 1996. 

Appendix Intro-9 193 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX INTRO-10: COUNTRY INFORMATION - NICARAGUA 

The following general information is provided on the country of 

Nicaragua:1 

Nicaragua is an extremely poor country, with an estimated per capita 

income of $465. The economy is predominantly agricultural, dependent on 

sugar, beef, coffee, and seafood exports, with some light manufacturing. The 

economy grew an estimated 5 percent in 1997--the fourth year of growth after a 

decade of contraction. The inflation rate was about 8 percent. The 

unemployment rate was officially estimated at 14 percent, with underemployment 

reaching 35 percent. Private investment increased, but was hindered by the slow 

resolution of long-standing property disputes stemming from massive 

confiscations by the Sandinista government of the 1980’s. In November the 

National Assembly passed a new property law intended to resolve confiscated 

property claims. The country continued to have a precarious balance of 

payments position and remained heavily dependent on foreign assistance. 

The civil war formally concluded in June 1990 with the demobilization of 

the Nicaraguan Resistance; however, society continued to be politically polarized 

and, despite the Government's disarmament campaigns, heavily armed. In 

particular, the rule of law, basic infrastructure, and conditions to guarantee 

personal security and economic opportunity did not extend to all rural areas. 

Reflecting these sources of instability, the level of violence, primarily criminal in 

nature, has remained high in the traditionally conflictive, poverty-stricken northern 

and north-central zones. During 1997, there was an average of one murder 

every 2 days in these areas, according to the press. Although there were no 

confirmed cases of politically motivated murders of either demobilized former RN 

members or former members of the Sandinista Popular Army (EPS), criminally 

motivated murders of members of both groups were common. 

U.S. Department of State, Nicaragua Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1997, released by 

the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, January 30, 1998.  ̨. 

194 Appendix Intro-10 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX INTRO-11: COUNTRY INFORMATION – EL SALVADOR 

The following general information is provided on the country of El 

Salvador:1 

El Salvador is a constitutional, multiparty democracy with an executive 

branch headed by a president and a unicameral legislature. Armando Calderon 

Sol of the Nationalist Republican Alliance Party (ARENA) was inaugurated 

President for a 5-year term in June 1994. In free and fair legislative elections in 

March, the former guerrilla organization Farabundo Marti National Liberation 

Front (FMLN) won a third of the Legislative Assembly seats, leaving the ARENA 

party with a one-vote plurality. Seven other parties also hold seats, including the 

conservative National Conciliation Party (PCN) and the centrist Christian 

Democratic Party (PDC). The Constitution provides for a separate, politically 

appointed, independent judiciary. 

Since the Peace Accords ended the 12-year civil war in 1992, the 

Government has reduced the armed forces (including civilian employees) by 70 

percent; redefined the role of the military, placing it under civilian control; created 

a new Civilian National Police (PNC); and integrated the former guerrillas into 

political life. Although its internal policing mission has been eliminated, the 

military continues to provide support for some PNC patrols in rural areas, a 

measure begun in 1995 to contain violence by well-armed criminal bands. The 

professionalism of the PNC generally improved, but the 4-year-old force 

continues to be understaffed, only minimally trained, and short on practical 

experience. Members of the police committed human rights abuses. 

El Salvador has a market-based, mixed economy largely based upon 

agriculture and light manufacturing. Some 40 percent of the workforce are in the 

agricultural sector; coffee and sugar are the principal export crops and major 

sources of foreign exchange. The growing light manufacturing sector (export 

processing zones) is dominated by apparel manufacturing and represents the 

main source of new jobs. The Government is committed to privatization and free 

market reforms. The economy is open, and private property is respected. The 

rate of real economic growth was about 4 percent, and per capita gross domestic 

product was estimated to be $1,930. About 52 percent of the population live 

below the poverty level. 

U.S. Department of State, El Salvador Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1997, released by 

the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, January 30, 1998. 

Appendix Intro-11 195 

1 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX A: LEGAL PREPARATION OF THE BATTLEFIELD (LPB)
 

Functional 

Legal 

Areas 

Phases 

of 

Operation 

Employment of Force Treatment of NonCombatants Staff Integration & 

Coordination 

Money [Contract, 

Fiscal & Claims] 

Force Administration 

and Support 

Force Discipline 

Mobilization & 

Predeployment 

ISB 

Counter 

Insurgency 

Defend 

Attack 

Post Conflict 

196 Appendix A
 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

A PROBLEM SOLVING MODEL FOR DEVELOPING OPERATIONAL LAW
 

PROFICIENCY:
 

AN ANALYTICAL TOOL FOR CLARIFYING THE COMPLEX1
 

Teach me and I’ll Forget;
 

Show me and I’ll Remember;
 

Let me do and I’ll Understand
 

The following note is designed to introduce a proposed model for 

developing operational law problem solving skills. A comprehensive package of 

materials intended to allow implementation of this model will be available for 

distribution during the upcoming World-Wide Continuing Legal Education Course 

at TJAGSA. However, the general framework presented here is offered as a 

foundation for implementation of such a skill development program. 

The genesis of this proposal was the use of this model during an elective 

in the 46th Graduate Course. This elective focused on a “clinical” approach to 

developing operational law expertise – application of knowledge previously 

presented during the core instruction to actual scenario driven events. The 

concept of building an elective around scenario driven issue resolution originated 

with Major Rich Whitaker, which became the original “military operations” elective 

for the 45th Graduate Course. This elective focused on a notional deployment 

and resolving issues for a Staff Judge Advocate preparing for various aspects of 

the deployment. 

During the next iteration of the elective, the concept of a scenario driven 

series of operational legal issues was refined in a number of ways. First, the 

class was divided into six “teams” for the entire six weeks. Each team would 

work together each week to resolve a designated legal issue, selecting one 

member to brief a resolution of the issue during the class. Second, the briefing 

was not presented to a hypothetical Staff Judge Advocate, but instead to a 

hypothetical Joint Task Force Commander. Third, in order to ensure the 

problems presented to the students reflected current issues being confronted in 

the field, representatives from the Center for Law and Military Operations 

participated in every aspect of the class. The methodology used during this 

elective to improve operational law expertise seems logically suited to the efforts 

to improve the skills of Judge Advocate’s in the field through the use of Officer 

Professional Development programs. 

1

 Army Lawyer Note by Major Geoffrey Corn, International and Operational Law Division, The Judge 

Advocate General’s School, US Army. MAJ Corn developed the LPB concept primarily as an analytical 

tool for proactively mapping out—predicting and addressing—the legal issues likely to arise during an 

operation and its phases. It has a secondary utility as a framework for exercises in operational law, and 

indeed, currently forms the basis for the second week of the International and Operational Law Division’s 

Operational Law Seminar. Copies of LPB matrices filled in with sample issues/problems and suggested 

solutions are available from the Department. 

Appendix A 197 
 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

The most significant refinement, however, was the organization of the 

problems. An “analytical template,” based primarily on the analytical method 

used in the tactical intelligence arena, was used to facilitate development of a 

variety of legal issues for student resolution. Those involved in development of 

this template quickly came to believe that the template itself had stand alone 

value. In short, if it facilitated development of legal issues related to a notional 

operation, couldn’t it also be a valuable planning tool for any Judge Advocate 

supporting a military operation by facilitating the anticipation of legal issues for 

the operation? 

This template, or chart, which is attached at Appendix A and described in 

detail below, became the foundation for the military operations elective. It was 

intended to serve two purposes. First, facilitate issue resolution by “pigeonholing” legal issues into manageable categories. Second, facilitate issue 

resolution by strengthening the Judge Advocate’s ability to anticipate legal issues 

related to the operation. Development of the template was motivated by a belief 

that: 1) the scope and diversity of operational legal issues mandated some 

mechanism to better manage analysis in the operational environment, and 2) an 

analytical tool that facilitated issue anticipation would greatly enhance the ability 

of the Judge Advocate to provide proactive legal support. 

This model shares a common thread with the “Intelligence Preparation of 

the Battlefield” analytical – that a systematic approach to anticipating issues is 

the best way to prepare to resolve those issues when they arise. Anticipating 

issues in order to facilitate success on the battlefield is the essence of the IPB 

process. In the operational law arena, a systematic approach to anticipating 

legal issues might result in a more proactive, versus reactive, delivery of legal 

support to any given military operation. In short, a Judge Advocate could 

conduct a “Legal Preparation of the Battlefield,” or “LPB,” in order to “brainstorm” 

probable legal issues, and prioritize the order of response to such issues. 

A simple graphic tool to manage the diverse range of legal issues likely to 

be encountered during a military operation is proposed by this article to facilitate 

this “LPB.” This tool takes the form of the chart attached at Appendix A. It 

creates analytical “pigeon holes” by intersecting each phase of the operation with 

six “Legal Operating Systems” – broad categories of legal issues likely to be 

encountered during a military operation. The value of thinking in such “pigeon 

holes” is two-fold. First, thinking of legal issues in terms of the “phases” of the 

operation being supported focuses the efforts of the Judge Advocate into the 

same time-line as supported commanders and their planners. This is an 

efficiency issue, helping the Judge Advocate to synchronize his or her own 

planning with that of the command. Second, the “pigeon holes” help the Judge 

Advocate to manage the tremendous diversity of legal issues he or she will have 

to deal with during the operation. This in turn makes analysis of these issues 

198 Appendix A
 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

more efficient, and aids in identifying where to focus his or her efforts with other 

staff elements. 

During the military operations elective, use of this analytical tool resulted 

in the development of thirty-six notional legal issues for student resolution. Each 

class session consisted of analysis of six of these issues. Analysis and issue 

resolution was conducted by student “teams.” According to the students who 

took the elective, there was great learning value in working in teams to resolve 

specific legal issues for a notional commander. Because the issues were 

intended to represent command initiated concerns, they were not phrased with 

the legal precision normally associated with “seminar” problems. Instead, they 

were in many cases intentionally vague, forcing the students to seek further 

clarification on the precise nature of the commanders concern. 

Each week the class focused on a different phase of a notional operation, 

based on the Joint Readiness Training Center scenario. The six phases covered 

were pre-Deployment, Intermediate Staging Base, Counter-Insurgency, Defense, 

Offense, and Post-Conflict Stability Operations. During each of these “phases,” 

each of the six groups was assigned a legal issue from one of the six Legal 

Operating Systems: Methods and Means of Warfare, Non-Combatants, Rules of 

Engagement, Money Issues (fiscal, contract, and claims), Administrative and 

Legal Assistance, and Staff Coordination. Each group would “brief” the 

commander for approximately ten minutes on the resolution of the question 

presented, and also prepare a one to two page fact sheet for the rest of the 

class. The briefing was deliberately interactive, with the “commander” probing 

the briefer, and emphasizing the limited time available for the briefing. After the 

briefings, the class would participate in a “hot wash” of the proposed resolution. 

The success of the process used in the class, for which the outstanding 

efforts of the students was primarily responsible, led to some “brainstorming” with 

the Center for Law and Military Operations on how the model might be offered to 

a wider audience. One concept suggested was video taping sessions, and then 

using the tape as a “distance learning” tool. However, there was strong 

consensus that the interactive nature of the briefings would be lost by simply 

having officers view a video taped session. 

The alternative, which this note is intended to implement, was to offer the 

basic scenario, the template of legal issues, and fact sheets for each issue (a 

solution), to Staff Judge Advocates for use as the foundation for an operational 

law OPD program. The proposed concept is for SJA’s to use their Operational 

Law attorneys as the program coordinator. The process begins with the Ops 

Law attorney presenting a briefing of the basic scenario, and the hypothetical 

mission. The SJA will role play the JTF commander, and highlight his or her 

“intent.” The operational law attorney (or OPD coordinating officer) will then 

create analysis “teams” composed of OSJA personnel. These teams will be 

given the basic scenario, and one legal issue from a “Legal Operating System” 

Appendix A 199 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

for phase one of the operation. The next six OPD sessions will see each team 

briefing the “commander” on resolution of their legal issue for that phase of the 

operation. The operational law attorney will then distribute copies of the 

“solution,” and along with the SJA “hot wash” the briefings. 

There are numerous potential benefits of using this model to improve 

operational law proficiency. The most significant, however, is placing Judge 

Advocates in the “do” position. Working through actual problems, and briefing 

resolution to a notional commander, should greatly enhance understanding of the 

relevant legal authority related to that issue. Some other benefits might include: 

improving the expertise of the operational law attorney by requiring him or her to 

become the “expert” on all issues, exposing Judge Advocates to the type of 

questioning they might encounter from a commander in an operational 

environment, and providing the SJA an opportunity to assess the ability of his or 

her subordinates to deal with such questioning. Finally, and perhaps most 

importantly, it should enhance the confidence of each Judge Advocate in his or 

her ability to manage the variety of legal issues encountered during an operation, 

resolve them efficiently and effectively, and present the resolution to the 

supported commander and staff.2 

2

 As indicated above, comprehensive package of materials intended to enable implementation of this 

training model will be distributed to interested SJA’s during the upcoming World Wide CLE. The package 

will include a basic factual scenario, analysis matrix, proposed “problems,” narrative description of each 

problem to facilitate focusing the analysis, a notional ROE annex, a notional SOFA, and one “fact sheet” 

type solution for each problem. 

200 Appendix A
 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

EXPLANATION OF THE “LEGAL OPERATING SYSTEMS” 

1. The analytical model represented by the attached matrix is built around the 

concept of categorizing issues into six “Legal Operating Systems,” or LOS’s. 

This is adapted from the “Battlefield Operating System” concept. Battlefield 

Operating Systems (BOS) are broad categories of combat functions used by 

Army leaders to aid in the planning and execution of combat operations. The 

seven BOS are intelligence, maneuver, fire support, air defense, mobility and 

survivability, logistics, and battle command. This list demonstrates that 

multiple combat functions of various elements of a combat unit are “pigeon 

holed” into broad categories to make them more manageable. According to 

FM 100-5, “At the tactical level the battlefield operating systems (BOS), for 

example, enable a comprehensive examination in a straightforward manner 

that facilitates the integration, coordination, preparation, and execution of 

successful combined arms operations.” 

2. The “Legal Operating Systems” that form the foundation of the Legal 

Preparation of the Battlefield (LPB) model are intended to serve the same 

function for the Judge Advocate as the Battlefield Operating Systems serve 

for the commander - enable a comprehensive examination in a 

straightforward manner that facilitates the integration, coordination, 

preparation, and execution of successful [legal support].” The six proposed 

LOS’s are: 

•	 Methods and Means of Warfare Issues 

•	 Non-Combatant Issues 

•	 Fiscal, Contract, and Claims Issues 

•	 Staff Coordination Issues 

•	 Administrative and LAO Issues 

•	 ROE Issues 

3.	 These six categories of operational legal issues are intended to facilitate the 

delivery of “proactive” legal support. Instead of attempting to randomly 

consider every potential legal issue related to an operation, the JA can think 

in terms of broad based systems representing commonly linked legal issues. 

This will hopefully help focus planning and analysis. When superimposed 

over the phases of the planned operation, this focus becomes even more 

defined, and assists the JA in allocating his or her analytical resources in 

accordance with the phased focus of the supported command. While these 

six LOS’s are certainly subject to modification based on the needs of the JA, 

a description of each will show that almost all operational legal issues can be 

covered by them. 

Appendix A	 201 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

a. Methods and Means of Warfare Issues. This LOS is intended to 

include all the traditional rules related to the “targeting” prong of the law of 

war. Specifically, any targeting related issues would fall under this LOS. 

The issues subject to analysis under this LOS range from defining the role 

of the JA in the targeting process, to analyzing the legal versus policy 

based application of the law of war, to analyzing the legality of proposed 

uses of weapons systems. 

b.	 Rules of Engagement LOS. This LOS is intentionally distinct from the 

Methods and Means of Warfare LOS to reinforce the point that ROE are 

not necessarily identical to the law of war. While they may be similar in 

practice, this distinction ensures that the JA analyzes the legality of 

employing force against both ROE based limitations and law of war based 

limitations. This LOS includes issues that range from ROE review and 

development, requests for modifications, ROE training, and the impact of 

ROE on specific operations. 

c. Non-Combatant LOS. This LOS includes all issues related to noncombatants during the operation. Issues under this LOS range from 

human rights obligations towards host nation civilians, to treatment of 

enemy non-combatants. 

d. Fiscal, Contract, and Claims LOS. This LOS is intended to pull 

together all “money” related legal issues. Issues analyzed under this LOS 

range from authority to expend funds for specific purposes, to solatia 

payments during combat operations. 

e. Staff Coordination LOS. This LOS is intended to force the JA to think 

of all the coordination related issues during the operation. It heavily 

emphasizes the coordination between the JA and PAO, PSYOPS, CA, 

DoS, and NGO’s. It enables the JA to anticipate how to propose utilization 

and coordination with these assets to facilitate the legitimacy of the 

mission. It also encompasses anticipating common support requirements 

from other staff elements. Issues analyzed under this LOS range from 

coordinating NGO visits, to proposing modifications to a SOFA. 

f. LAO, Disciplinary, Administrative LOS. This LOS is intended to cover 

both legal assistance related issues, and other “administrative” type 

issues. This LOS includes all the classic legal assistance issues likely to 

be encountered during an operation. It also covers dealing with 

administrative and disciplinary issues related to civilians accompanying 

the force, and the logistics of actually providing legal support to the 

command (the “where do I go and what do I do issues). Finally, it is 

intended to be a “catch-all” category to cover other issues that might fall 

through the cracks, such as criminal law and investigation related issues. 

202	 Appendix A
 
ERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTIONS

U.S. Military Involvement Process

Domestic Disaster Relief: Hurricane Georges

uerto Rico & USVI

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999 

Appendix B-1 203 

APPENDIX B-1: US MILITARY INVOLVEMENT PROCESS FOR DISASTER 

RELIEF OPERATIONS 

EM FUNCTIONS SUPPORT REQUESTS 

STATE 

EMERGENCY 

MANAGEMENT

 AGENCY 

FEDERAL 

COORDINATING 

OFFICER (FCO)

 JOI NT STA FF SEC ARMY 

SOUTHCOM 

DOMS 

SECDEF 

CINC 

DEFENSE 

COORDINATING 

OFFICER (DCO) 

DISASTER FIELD OFFICE 

STATE 

COORDINATING 

OFFICER 

FEMA DIRECTOR 

GOVERNOR 

Event 

(P ) 

U.S. Military Involvement Process 

Domestic Disaster Relief: Hurricane Georges 

(Puerto Rico & USVI) 

PRESIDENT 
U.S. Military Involvement Process

Foreign Disaster Relief: Hurricane Mitch

atin America & Caribb

Disaster 

Site

(L ean)

U.S. Military Involvement Process 

Foreign Disaster Relief: Hurricane Mitch 

(Latin America & Caribbean) 

Province 

Emergency 

Management 

Head 

Office 

of 

Government 

Municipal 

Disaster 

Office

 SEC STATE

 SECDEF U SMILGP 

SOUTHCOM 

Joint Staff (JCS) 

Disaster 

Site 

OFDA 

USAID/OFDA 

Hit/Affected 

Areas 

U.S. Ambassador 

Local 

USAID/OFDA 

Office 

DART 

Component 

204 Appendix B-1 CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY 

O PERATIONS 
 
U.S. Military Involvement Process

When Presidential Decision Directive (PDD)

56, Managing Complex Contingency

erations s A ed

Disaster 

Site

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999 

Appendix B-1 205 

Op , I ppli

U.S. Military Involvement Process 

When Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 

56, Managing Complex Contingency 

Operations, Is Applied 

STATE DEPT 

Disaster 

Site 

USMILGP 

CINC 

Joint Staff (JCS) OFDA DART Team 

OTHER DEPTS 

AS APPROPRIATE DEPT OF DEFENSE 

Legal and 

Fiscal 

Subgroup 

Executive Committee 

(ExCom) 

Deputies Committee 

Component 

Pol-Mil Plan 

Other US Gov. Players 

Interagency 

Working

 Groups 

Interagency 

Working

 Groups 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX B-2: ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS FOR US DEPARTMENT OF 

DEFENSE 

206 Appendix B-2 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix B-2 207
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

208 Appendix B-2
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix B-2 209
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

210 Appendix B-2
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix B-2 211
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

212 Appendix B-2
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix B-2 213
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX B-3: ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS FOR US DEPARTMENT OF 

STATE, US AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (USAID), 

AND THE OFFICE FOR FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE (OFDA) 

US Department of State
 

214 Appendix B-3 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999 

USAID 

The chart below represents the major components of USAID as of January, 

1999.1 

US Agency for International Development
 

OFDA 

1

 US Agency for International Development, USAID Organizational Chart (visited Apr. 13, 2000) 

<http://www.info.usaid.gov/about/usaidchart.htm>. 

Appendix B-3 215 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX B-4: ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS FOR DEFENSE SECURITY 

COOPERATION AGENCY (DSCA) AND ITS OFFICE OF HUMANITARIAN 

ASSISTANCE AND DEMINING (OHAD)1 

Defense Security Cooperation Agency
 

216 Appendix B-4 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Office of Humanitarian Assistance and Demining
 

HAP for EUCOM 

Excess Property 

HAP for ACOM 

Transportation 

Disaster Relief 

Humanitarian Daily Rations 

Demining for EUCOM 

HCA 

HAP & Demining for 

CENTCOM 

HAP & Demining for 

SOCOM 

PACOM 

HAP & Demining for 

SOUTHCOM 

Director of OHAD 

Administrative Support 

HAP = Humanitarian Assistance Program
 

NOTE: Each of these positions is usually only one person deep.
 

OHDA Contact Information:
 

Phone (703) 601-3658 • Facsimile number (703) 602-0075.
 

DSN Phone 332-0075 • DSN Facsimile 329-3758.
 

Address: DSCA-HA/D • 2800 Defense Pentagon •


Washington, DC 20301-2800
 

Appendix B-4 217
 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX B-5: PRESIDENTIAL DECISION DIRECTIVE (PDD) 56 

MANAGING COMPLEX CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS 

White House White Paper On PDD/NSC 561
 

Managing Complex Contingency Operations
 

May 1997
 

(NOTE: PDD 56 Is Classified. Below is the White House White Paper on
 

(Unclassified Summary of) PDD 56
 

The Clinton Administration’s Policy on
 

Managing Complex Contingency Operations:
 

Presidential Decision Directive
 

May 1997
 

Purpose 

This White Paper explains key elements of the Clinton Administration’s policy 

on managing complex contingency operations. This unclassified document is 

promulgated for use by government officials as a handy reference for 

interagency planning of future complex contingency operations. Also, it is 

intended for use in U.S. Government professional education institutions, such 

as the National Defense University and the National Foreign Affairs Training 

Center, for coursework and exercises on interagency practices and 

procedures. Regarding this paper’s utility as representation of the President’s 

Directive, it contains all the key elements of the original PDD that are needed 

for effective implementation by agency officials. Therefore, wide 

dissemination of this unclassified White Paper is encouraged by all agencies 

of the U.S. Government. Note that while this White Paper explains the PDD, it 

does not override the official PDD. 

Background 

In the wake of the Cold War, attention has focused on a rising number of 

territorial disputes, armed ethnic conflicts, and civil wars that pose threats to 

regional and international peace and may be accompanied by natural or 

manmade disasters which precipitate massive human suffering. We have 

1

 Presidential Decision Directive 56, The Clinton Administration’s Policy on Managing Complex 

Contingency Operations (May 1997) < http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd56.htm>. 

218 Appendix B-5 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

learned that effective responses to these situations may require multidimensional operations composed of such components as political/diplomatic, 

humanitarian, intelligence, economic development, and security: hence the 

term complex contingency operations. 

The PDD defines "complex contingency operations" as peace operations 

such as the peace accord implementation operation conducted by NATO in 

Bosnia (1995-present) and the humanitarian intervention in northern Iraq 

called Operation Provide Comfort (1991); and foreign humanitarian 

assistance operations, such as Operation Support Hope in central Africa 

(1994) and Operation Sea Angel in Bangladesh (1991). Unless otherwise 

directed, this PDD does not apply to domestic disaster relief or to relatively 

routine or small-scale operations, nor to military operations conducted in 

defense of U.S. citizens, territory, or property, including counter-terrorism and 

hostage-rescue operations and international armed conflict. 

In recent situations as diverse as Haiti, Somalia, Northern Iraq, and the 

former Yugoslavia, the United States has engaged in complex contingency 

operations in coalition, either under the auspices of an international or 

regional organization or in ad hoc, temporary coalitions of like-minded states. 

While never relinquishing the capability to respond unilaterally, the PDD 

assumes that the U.S. will continue to conduct future operations in coalition 

whenever possible. 

We must also be prepared to manage the humanitarian, economic and 

political consequences of a technological crisis where chemical, biological, 

and/or radiological hazards may be present. The occurrence of any one of 

these dimensions could significantly increase the sensitivity and complexity of 

a U.S. response to a technological crisis. 

In many complex emergencies the appropriate U.S. Government response 

will incur the involvement of only non-military assets. In some situations, we 

have learned that military forces can quickly affect the dynamics of the 

situation and may create the conditions necessary to make significant 

progress in mitigating or resolving underlying conflict or dispute. However, we 

have also learned that many aspects of complex emergencies may not be 

best addressed through military measures. Furthermore, given the level of 

U.S. interests at stake in most of these situations, we recognize that U.S. 

forces should not be deployed in an operation indefinitely. 

It is essential that the necessary resources be provided to ensure that we are 

prepared to respond in a robust, effective manner. To foster a durable peace 

or stability in these situations and to maximize the effect of judicious military 

deployments, the civilian components of an operation must be integrated 

closely with the military components. 

While agencies of government have developed independent capacities to 

respond to complex emergencies, military and civilian agencies should 

Appendix B-5 219 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

operate in a synchronized manner through effective interagency management 

and the use of special mechanisms to coordinate agency efforts. Integrated 

planning and effective management of agency operations early on in an 

operation can avoid delays, reduce pressure on the military to expand its 

involvement in unplanned ways, and create unity of effort within an operation 

that is essential for success of the mission. 

Intent of the PDD 

The need for complex contingency operations is likely to recur in future years, 

demanding varying degrees of U.S. involvement. The PDD calls for all U.S. 

Government agencies to institutionalize what we have learned from our 

recent experiences and to continue the process of improving the planning and 

management of complex contingency operations. The PDD is designed to 

ensure that the lessons learned -- including proven planning processes and 

implementation mechanisms -- will be incorporated into the interagency 

process on a regular basis. The PDD’s intent is to establish these 

management practices to achieve unity of effort among U.S. Government 

agencies and international organizations engaged in complex contingency 

operations. Dedicated mechanisms and integrated planning processes are 

needed. From our recent experiences, we have learned that these can help 

to: 

•	 identify appropriate missions and tasks, if any, for U.S. Government 

agencies in a U.S. Government response; 

•	 develop strategies for early resolution of crises, thereby minimizing the 

loss of life and establishing the basis for reconciliation and 

reconstruction; 

•	 accelerate planning and implementation of the civilian aspects of the 

operation; 

•	 intensify action on critical funding and personnel requirements early 

on; 

•	 integrate all components of a U.S. response (civilian, military, police, 

etc.) at the policy level and facilitate the creation of coordination 

mechanisms at the operational level; and 

•	 rapidly identify issues for senior policy makers and ensure expeditious 

implementation of decisions. 

The PDD requires all agencies to review their legislative and budget 

authorities for supporting complex contingency operations and, where such 

authorities are inadequate to fund an agency’s mission and operations in 

complex contingencies, propose legislative and budgetary solutions. 

Executive Committee 

220	 Appendix B-5 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

The PDD calls upon the Deputies Committee to establish appropriate 

interagency working groups to assist in policy development, planning, and 

execution of complex contingency operations. Normally, the Deputies 

Committee will form an Executive Committee (ExCom) with appropriate 

membership to supervise the day-to-day management of U.S. participation in 

a complex contingency operation. The ExCom will bring together 

representatives of all agencies that might participate in the operation, 

including those not normally part of the NSC structure. When this is the case, 

both the Deputies Committee and the ExCom will normally be augmented by 

participating agency representatives. In addition, the chair of the ExCom will 

normally designate an agency to lead a legal and fiscal advisory sub-group, 

whose role is to consult with the ExCom to ensure that tasks assigned by the 

ExCom can be performed by the assigned agencies consistent with legal and 

fiscal authorities. This ExCom approach has proved useful in clarifying 

agency responsibilities, strengthening agency accountability, ensuring 

interagency coordination, and developing policy options for consideration by 

senior policy makers. 

The guiding principle behind the ExCom approach to interagency 

management is the personal accountability of presidential appointees. 

Members of the ExCom effectively serve as functional managers for specific 

elements of the U.S. Government response (e.g., refugees, demobilization, 

elections, economic assistance, police reform, public information, etc.). They 

implement the strategies agreed to by senior policy makers in the interagency 

and report to the ExCom and Deputies Committee on any problems or issues 

that need to be resolved. 

In future complex contingency operations to which the United States 

contributes substantial resources, the PDD calls upon the Deputies 

Committee to establish organizational arrangements akin to those of the 

ExCom approach. 

The Political-Military Implementation Plan 

The PDD requires that a political-military implementation plan (or "pol-mil 

plan") be developed as an integrated planning tool for coordinating U.S. 

government actions in a complex contingency operation. The pol-mil plan will 

include a comprehensive situation assessment, mission statement, agency 

objectives, and desired endstate. It will outline an integrated concept of 

operations to synchronize agency efforts. The plan will identify the primary 

preparatory issues and tasks for conducting an operation (e.g., congressional 

consultations, diplomatic efforts, troop recruitment, legal authorities, funding 

requirements and sources, media coordination, etc.). It will also address 

major functional / mission area tasks (e.g., political mediation / reconciliation, 

military support, demobilization, humanitarian assistance, police reform, basic 

public services, economic restoration, human rights monitoring, social 

reconciliation, public information, etc.). (Annex A contains an illustrative 

outline of a pol-mil plan.) 

Appendix B-5 221 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

With the use of the pol-mil plan, the interagency can implement effective 

management practices, namely, to centralize planning and decentralize 

execution during the operation. The desired unity of effort among the various 

agencies that is created through the use of the pol-mil plan contributes to the 

overall success of these complex operations. 

When a complex contingency operation is contemplated in which the U.S. 

Government will play a substantial role, the PDD calls upon the Deputies 

Committee to task the development of a pol-mil plan and assign specific 

responsibilities to the \appropriate ExCom officials. 

Each ExCom official will be required to develop their respective part of the 

plan, which will be fully coordinated among all relevant agencies. This 

development process will be transparent and analytical, resulting in issues 

being posed to senior policy makers for resolution. Based on the resulting 

decisions, the plan will be finalized and widely distributed among relevant 

agencies. 

The PDD also requires that the pol-mil plan include demonstrable milestones 

and measures of success including detailed planning for the transition of the 

operation to activities which might be performed by a follow-on operation or 

by the host government. According to the PDD, the pol-mil plan should be 

updated as the mission progresses to reflect milestones that are (or are not) 

met and to incorporate changes in the situation on the ground. 

Interagency Pol-Mil Plan Rehearsal 

A critical aspect of the planning process will be the interagency 

rehearsal/review of the pol-mil plan. As outlined in the PDD, this activity 

involves a rehearsal of the plan's main elements, with the appropriate ExCom 

official presenting the elements for which he or she is responsible. By 

simultaneously rehearsing/reviewing all elements of the plan, differences over 

mission objectives, agency responsibilities, timing/synchronization, and 

resource allocation can be identified and resolved early, preferably before the 

operation begins. The interagency rehearsal/review also underscores the 

accountability of each program manager in implementing their assigned area 

of responsibility. During execution, regular reviews of the plan ensure that 

milestones are met and that appropriate adjustments are made. 

The PDD calls upon the Deputies Committee to conduct the interagency 

rehearsal/review of the pol-mil plan. Supporting agency plans are to be 

presented by ExCom officials before a complex contingency operation is 

launched (or as early as possible once the operation begins), before a 

subsequent critical phase during the operation, as major changes in the 

mission occur, and prior to an operation's termination. 

After-Action Review 

222 Appendix B-5 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

After the conclusion of each operation in which this planning process is 

employed, the PDD directs the ExCom to charter an after-action review 

involving both those who participated in the operation and Government 

experts who monitored its execution. This comprehensive assessment of 

interagency performance will include a review of interagency planning and 

coordination, (both in Washington and in the field), legal and budgetary 

difficulties encountered, problems in agency execution, as well as proposed 

solutions, in order to capture lessons learned and to ensure their 

dissemination to relevant agencies. 

Training 

The U.S. Government requires the capacity to prepare agency officials for the 

responsibilities they will be expected to take on in a planning and managing 

agency efforts in a complex contingency operation. Creating a cadre of 

professionals familiar with this integrated planning process will improve the 

USG’s ability to manage future operations. 

In the interest of advancing the expertise of government officials, agencies 

are encouraged to disseminate the Handbook for Interagency Management of 

Complex Contingency Operations published by OASD(S&R) Strategy at (703) 

614-0421. 

With the support of the State and Defense Departments, the PDD requires 

the NSC to work with the appropriate U.S. Government educational 

institutions--including the National Defense University, the National Foreign 

Affairs Training Center and the Army War College--to develop and conduct an 

interagency training program. This program, which should be held at least 

annually, will train mid-level managers (Deputy Assistant Secretary level) in 

the development and implementation of pol-mil plans for complex contingency 

operations. Those participating should have an opportunity to interact with 

expert officials from previous operations to learn what has worked in the past. 

Also, the PDD calls upon appropriate U.S. government educational 

institutions to explore the appropriate way to incorporate the pol-mil planning 

process into their curricula. 

Agency Review and Implementation 

Finally, the PDD directs each agency to review the adequacy of their 

agency’s structure, legal authorities, budget levels, personnel system, 

training, and crisis management procedures to insure that we, as a 

government, are learning from our experiences with complex contingency 

operations and institutionalizing the lessons learned. 

Annex A: Illustrative Components of a Political-Military Plan for a 

Complex Contingency Operation 

Appendix B-5 223 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

• Situation Assessment. A comprehensive assessment of the situation to 

clarify essential information that, in the aggregate, provides a multidimensional picture of the crisis. 

• U.S. Interests. A statement of U.S. interests at stake in the crisis and 

the requirement to secure those interests. 

• Mission Statement. A clear statement of the USG’s strategic purpose 

for the operation and the pol-mil mission. 

• Objectives. The key civil-military objectives to be accomplished during 

the operation. 

• Desired Pol-Mil End State. The conditions the operation is intended to 

create before the operation transitions to a follow-on operation and/or 

terminates. 

• Concept of the Operation. A conceptual description of how the various 

instruments of USG policy will be integrated to get the job done 

throughout all phases of the operation. 

• Lead Agency Responsibilities. An assignment of responsibilities for 

participating agencies. 

• Transition/Exit Strategy. A strategy that is linked to the realization of 

the end state described above, requiring the integrated efforts of 

diplomats, military leaders, and relief officials of the USG and the 

international community. 

• Organizational Concept. A schematic of the various organizational 

structures of the operation, in Washington and in theater, including a 

description of the chain of authority and associated reporting channels. 

• Preparatory Tasks. A layout of specific tasks to be undertaken before 

the operation begins (congressional consultations, diplomatic efforts, 

troop recruitment, legal authorities, funding requirements and sources, 

media coordination, etc.). 

• Functional or Mission Area Tasks / Agency Plans. Key operational and 

support plans written by USG agencies that pertain to critical parts of 

the operation (e.g., political mediation/reconciliation, military support, 

demobilization, humanitarian assistance, police reform, basic public 

services, economic restoration, human rights monitoring, social 

reconciliation, public information, etc.). 

224 Appendix B-5 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX B-6: NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOS) AND 

PRIVATE VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIONS (PVOS) 

NOTE: Inclusion below does not constitute official or unofficial endorsement of 

any particular organization or its members, platform, or ideals. Similarly, failure 

to list or include an organization does not constitute a statement or judgment of 

any kind about that organization, its members, platform or ideals. This list is 

merely an attempt to convey an idea of the magnitude and focus of NGOs and 

PVOs and primarily lists only US-based NGOs/PVOs. 

NOTE: USAID maintains an Internet accessible list of those US and non-US 

private and voluntary organizations that are registered with USAID. See the site 

http://intranet.dimen-intl.com/usaid/. 

NOTE: Most of the organizations listed below who played a part in the Hurricane 

Mitch relief efforts have information on their work available through their web 

sites. 

Reference Address (URL http://) 

A Call To Serve International (ACTS) E-MAIL...actsg@actsg.ge 

A Self-Help Assistance Program (ASAP) www.angelfire.com/or/asap 

Academy for Educational Development, The (AED) http://www.aed.org 

ACCION International http://www.accion.org 

ACDI/VOCA (ACDI) http://www.acdivoca.org 

Action Against Hunger 

Private, non-political, non denominational and non-profit making , 

it was set up in France in 1979 to intervene in countries 

throughout the world. 

http://www.acf-fr.org/eng/homefm.htm 

Action Against Hunger-USA (AAH-USA) http://www.aah-usa.org 

Action by Churches Together (ACT) 

Action by Churches Together (ACT) is an alliance of churches 

and relief agencies responding to emergencies in more than 50 

countries worldwide. ACT International assists thousands of men, 

women and children recovering from emergencies worldwide. 

ACT offers assistance to victims of natural disasters as well as 

emergencies caused by war and civil conflict. 

http://www.act-intl.org/ 

Action for Enterprise (AFE) www.actionforenterprise.org 

Action Without Borders http://www.idealist.org/ 

Appendix B-6 225 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Lists 20,000 nonprofit and community organizations in 140 

countries, which you can search or browse by name, location or 

mission. 

Adoption Exchange, Inc., The (The Rocky Mountain Adoption 

Exchange) 

http://www.adoptex.org 

Adventist Development & Relief Agency (ARDA) International http://www.adra.org/ 

Adventist Development and Relief Agency International, Inc. 

(ADRA) 

http://www.adra.org 

Advocates for Youth http://www.advocatesforyouth.org 

Africa-America Institute, The (AAI) www.aaionline.org 

African Children Welfare Foundation (ACWF) P.O. Box 4236, Culver City, CA 90231 

African Community Resource Center, Inc. (ACRC) www.africancommunity.org 

African Medical & Research Foundation, Inc. (AMREF) http://www.amref.org 

African Medical and Research Foundation 

AMREF's mission, in partnership with communities, governments 

and donors, is to improve health care among the disadvantaged 

in sub-Saharan Africa through service delivery, training and 

research. AMREF is a field-orientated organization that 

implements programs. It does not make grants. 

http://www.amre.org/ 

African Methodist Episcopal Church Service & Development 

Agency, Inc., The (SADA) 

E-MAIL...tynewell@aol.com 

African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) 103 South 4th Street, Aurora, IL 60505 

Africare www.africare.org 

Aga Khan Foundation U.S.A. (AKF USA) E-MAIL...akfusa@atge.automail.com 

Agudath Israel of America, Inc. E-MAIL...agudath@aol.com 

Aid to Artisans, Inc. (ATA) http://www.aid2artisans.org 

Air Serv International, Inc. (ASI) http://www.airserv.org 

Alfalit International, Inc. http://www.alfalit.org 

Alliance for Communities in Action P.O. Box 30154, Bethesda, MD 20824 

America-Mideast Educational & Training Services (AMIDEAST) http://www.amideast.org 

American Assembly, The http://www.americanassembly.org 

American Association for International Aging, Inc. (AAIA) E-MAIL...worldaging@aol.com 

American Association of the Order of St. Lazarus, Inc. (Order of 

St. Lazarus) 

E-MAIL...lazarususa@aol.com 

American College of Nurse-Midwives (ACNM) http://www.wife.org 

American Committee for Shaare Zedek Hospital in Jerusalem, http://www.szmc.org.il 

226 Appendix B-6 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Inc. 

American Council on Education (ACE) http://www.acenet.edu 

American Dentists for Foreign Service (ADFS) 619 Church Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11218 

American Friends of Kiryat Sanz Laniado Hospital, Inc. www.laniado.com 

American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) http://www.afsc.org 

American Himalayan Foundation (AHF) http://www.bena.com/nepaltrek/ahf/ahf. 

html 

American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, Inc., The (AJJDC) http://www.jdc.org 

American Jewish World Service, Inc. (AJWS) http://www.ajws.org 

American Latvian Association in the United States, Inc. (ALA) http://www.alausa.org 

American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities, Inc. (ALSAC) http://www.stjude.org 

American Leprosy Missions (ALM International) http://www.leprosy.org 

American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA) http://www.anera.org 

American ORT, Inc. (ORT) http://www.aort.org 

American Red Magen David for Israel (ARMDI) www.armdi.org 

American Refugee Committee http://www.archq.org 

American Service to India (ASTI) http://www.americanservicetoindia.geo 

cities.com 

American-Nicaraguan Foundation, Inc. (ANF) anfusa@aol.com 

AmeriCares Foundation, Inc. (AmeriCares) http://www.americares.org 

Americas Association of Cooperative/Mutual Insurance Societies, 

Inc. (AAC-MIS) 

cobbs@nationwide.com 

America's Development Foundation, Inc. (ADF) http://www.adfusa.org 

Amigos Internacionales Corporation (Amigos) http://www.geocities.com/heartland/wo 

ods/1633 

Amigos of EARTH College, Inc. (EARTH) http://www.earth.ac.cr 

Amnesty International http://www.amnesty.org/ 

Ananda Marga Universal Relief Team, Inc. (AMURT) http://www.amurt.org 

Andean Rural Health Care, Inc. (ARHC) http://www.main.nc.us/ARHC 

Armenia Fund U.S.A., Inc. (AFUSA) www.armeniafundusa.org 

Armenian Assembly of America, Inc. (AAA) http://www.aaainc.org 

Armenian Missionary Association of America, Inc. (AMAA) E-MAIL...amaainc@aol.com 

Armenian Relief Society of Eastern USA, Inc., The (ARSNA) E-MAIL...ars1910@aol.com 

Armenian Relief Society, Inc., The (ARS, Inc.) http://www.ars1910.org 

Armenian Technology Group, Inc. (ATG) E-MAIL...atgusa@aol.com 

Appendix B-6 227 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Asia Foundation, The (TAF) http://www.asiafoundation.org 

Assist International (AI) http://www.assistintl.org 

Atlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc. (ASLF) www.aslf.org 

AVSC International http://www.avsc.org 

Bat Conservation International, Inc. (BCI) http://www.batcon.org 

Bethany Christian Services International, Inc. http://www.bethany.org 

Bless the Children, Inc. (BTC) http://www.blessthechildren.org 

Blessings International (Blessings) http://www.blessings.org 

Books For Africa, Inc. (BFA) www.booksforafrica.org 

Brackett Foundation, The www.brackett.colgate.edu 

British Overseas NGOs for Development (BOND) 

BOND was founded in June 1993, on the initiative of 61 NGOs, 

and now has 213 members. It is officially recognized by the UK 

government's Department for International Development (DFID). 

http://www.bond.org.uk/ 

Brother's Brother Foundation (BBF) http://www.brothersbrother.com 

Burma American Fund, Inc., The (BAF) 160 West End Avenue, Suite 18J 

New York, NY 10023 

C.I.S. Development Foundation, Inc. (CISDF) http://www.cisdf.com 

CARE http://www.care.org/ 

CARE 

CARE stands for Coop American Relief Everywhere. CARE 

International is a non-sectarian (non-religious), nongovernmental, non-profit development and relief organization with 

programs and activities in over 60 countries. CARE’s mission is 

to help the developing world’s poor in their efforts to achieve 

long-term social and economic well-being and to offer relief in 

times of crisis when there is acute suffering and life is threatened. 

CARE’s task is to reach new standards of excellence in offering 

disaster and emergency relief, technical assistance, training, 

food, other material resources and management in combinations 

appropriate to local needs and priorities. CARE’s focus is longterm, lasting change. CARE supports processes that create 

competence and self-sustainment over time. CARE International 

has an annual budget of approximately $500 million. 

http://www.care.org/ 

Carelift International http://www.carelift.org 

Caribbean Conservation Corporation (CCC) http://www.cccturtle.org 

Caribbean/Latin American Action (CNLAA) www.claa.org 

Caritas Australia 

Catholic relief organization and member of Caritas Internationalis, 

http://www.caritas.org.au/Default.html 

228 Appendix B-6 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

an emergency response network. 

Carter Center, Inc., The (CC) http://www.cartercenter.org 

Catholic Medical Mission Board, Inc. (CMMB) http://www.cmmb.org 

Catholic Near East Welfare Association (CNEWA) http://www.cnewa.org 

Catholic Relief Services 

Catholic Relief Services (CRS) was founded in 1943 by the 

Catholic Bishops of the United States to assist the poor and 

disadvantaged outside this country. The organization is 

committed to the alleviation of human suffering, the development 

of people and the fostering of charity and justice in the world. 

CRS provides direct aid to the poor, and involves people in their 

own development. 

http://www.catholicrelief.org/ 

Center for Citizen Initiatives (CCI) http://www.igc.org/cci 

Center for Communications, Health and the Environment 

(CECHE) 

http://www.ceche.org 

Center for Health, Education and Economic Research, Inc., The 

(CHEER, Inc.) 

cheer@misnet.com 

Center for International Environmental Law, Inc. (CIEL) http://www.ciel.org 

Center for Victims of Torture (CVT) http://www.cvt.org 

Centre for Development and Population Activities, The (CEDPA) http://www.cedpa.org 

Child Health Foundation (CHF, International Child Health 

Foundation (ICHF)) 

http://www.childhealthfoundation.org 

ChildHope Foundation (CHUSA) childhope@igc.org 

Children - Surgical Aid International (SACOW) http://www.childrenscharities.org/saco 

w.html 

Children International http://www.children.org 

Children of Chornobyl Relief Fund, Inc. (CCRF) http://www.ccrf-iccf.org 

Children's Christian Storehouse, Inc. www.jiii.com/ccsi 

Children's Home Society of Minnesota (CHSM) http://www.chsm.com 

Children's Hunger Relief Fund, Inc. (CHRF) icrf@sonic.net 

Christian Aid http://www.christianaid.org.uk/main.htm 

Christian Blind Mission International (CBMI) http://www.cbmi-usa.org 

Christian Children's Fund, Inc. (CCF) http://www.christianchildrensfund.org 

Christian Mission Aid (C.M.A.) www.cmaid.org 

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) ryskampa@crcna.org 

Christian Relief Services Charities http://www.christianrelief.org 

Christian World Adoption (CWA) http://www.cwa.org 

Appendix B-6 229 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Church World Service 

Church World Service, the relief and development agency of the 

National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A., has a 

unique capacity to respond rapidly to natural and human-caused 

disasters through an established world-wide network of local 

partners it supports via counsel, technical assistance, training, 

funding, and material resources. 

http://www.ncccusa.org/CWS/emre/ 

Church World Service, Inc. (CWS, Inc.) http://www.churchworldservice.org 

CitiHope International, Inc. E-MAIL...CitiHopeCH@aol.com 

Citizens Democracy Corps, Inc. (CDC) http://www.cdc.org 

Citizens Network for Foreign Affairs, The (CNFA) http://www.cnfa.com 

Community of Caring (COC) E-MAIL...caring@velocity.net 

Community Options, Inc. (COI) http://www.comop.org 

Compatible Technology, Inc. (CTI) E-MAIL...cti@piper.hamline.edu 

CONCERN Worldwide (U.S.), Inc. http://www.concernusa.org 

Conservation International Foundation, The (CI) http://www.conservation.org 

Consortium for the MBA Enterprise Corps, Inc., The (MBA 

Enterprise Corps (MBAEC)) 

http://www.unc.edu/depts/mbaec 

Cooperative Housing Foundation (CHF) http://www.chfhq.org 

Cooperative Office for Voluntary Organizations, Inc. (COVOL) http://www.covol.org 

Coptic Orphans Support Association (COSA) http://www.copticorphans.com 

Corporate Council on Africa, The (CCA) http://www.africacncl.org 

COUNTERPART International, Inc. http://www.counterpart.org 

Covenant House (CH) http://www.covenanthouse.org 

Credo International www.geocities.com/rainforest/canopy 

Crippled Children's United Rehabilitation Effort (CCURE) http://www.ccure.org 

Crudem Foundation (CRUDEM) http://www.icon-stl.net/~holc 

Davis Memorial Goodwill Industries, Inc. (DMGI) 2200 South Dakota Avenue NE 

Washington, DC 20018 

Delphi International http://www.delphi-int.org 

Direct Relief International http://www.directrelief.org/ 

Direct Relief International (DRI) http://www.directrelief.org 

Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) http://www.dredf.org 

DKT International, Inc. (DKT) dktmichele@delphi.com 

Doctors of the World, Inc. (DOW) http://www.doctorsoftheworld.org 

Doctors Without Borders http://www.dwb.org/index.htm 

230 Appendix B-6 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

http://www.msf.org/ 

Doctors Without Borders (d/b/a Medecins Sans Frontieres) http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org 

Dooley Foundation - Intermed, Inc., The E-MAIL...dooleyfdn@aol.com 

Double Harvest, Inc. E-MAIL...bert-vwi@ioa.com 

Doulos Community, Inc. (DOULOS) E-MAIL...jasko@monmouth.com 

Drug Donations http://www.drugdonations.org/ 

Ducks Unlimited (DU) http://www.ducks.org 

E&Co E-MAIL...eco@energyhouse.com 

Education Development Center, Inc. (EDC, Inc.) http://www.edc.org 

Educational and Research Foundation for the AAFPRS (AAFPRS 

Foundation) 

http://www.aafprs.org 

Egyptians Relief Association (ERA) E-MAIL...messeh@erols.com 

Elwyn, Inc. http://www.elwyn.org 

Enersol Associates, Inc. http://www.enersol.org 

ENTERPRISE Development International (EDI) http://www.endpoverty.com 

Enterpriseworks Worldwide, Inc. (EWW) http://www.enterpriseworks.org 

Environmental Law Institute (ELI) http://www.eli.org 

Eritrean Development Foundation www.eridf.org 

Esperanca, Inc. www.esperanca.org 

Ethiopian Community Development Council, Inc. (ECDC) www.ecdcinternational.org 

Family Care International (FCI) http://www.familycareintl.org 

Family Health International (FHI) http://www.fhi.org 

Federation of Jain Associations in North America (JAINA) 135 Morningside Drive, Grand Island, NY 

14072 

Feed My People International, Ltd. (FMPI) http://www.childrenscharities.org/feed 

mypeople.html 

Feed the Children, Inc. (d/b/a Feed the Children) http://www.feedthechildren.org 

Financial Services Volunteer Corps, Inc. (FSVC) www.fsvc.org 

Floresta USA, Inc. (FU) http://www.Floresta.org 

Florida Association of Voluntary Agencies for Caribbean Action, 

Inc. (FAVA/CA) 

http://www.favaca.org 

Food Corps, USA, Inc. morgenthau@brandeis.edu 

Food First, Inc. www.foodfirst.webvalley.com 

Food for Hungry http://www.fh.org/ 

Food for Life Global http://www.ffl.org/ 

Appendix B-6 231 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Food for the Hungry, Inc. (FH) http://www.fh.org 

Food for the Poor, Inc. (FFP) http://www.foodforthepoor.com 

Forest Management Trust, Inc., The (TFMT) http://www.foresttrust.org 

Forging New Tomorrows, Inc. (FNT) http://www.fnt-usa.org 

Foundation for a Civil Society, Ltd., The (FCS) E-MAIL...info@fcsny.org 

Foundation for International Community Assistance, Inc. (FINCA 

International, Inc.) 

http://www.villagebanking.org 

Foundation for Understanding and Enhancement (FUNEN) http://www.funen.org 

Foundation Hirondelle http://www.hirondelle.org/ 

Foundation of Compassionate American Samaritans (FOCAS) E-MAIL...focas@aol.com 

Freedom from Hunger http://www.freefromhunger.org/ 

Freedom from Hunger http://www.freefromhunger.org 

Freedom House, Inc. http://www.freedomhouse.org 

Friends of Animals, Inc. (FoA) http://www.friendsofanimals.org 

Friends of Conservation - Friends of the Masai Mara (FOC) E-MAIL...ncooke@abercrombiekent.com 

Friends of Liberia, Inc. (FOL) liberia@fol.org 

Fund for Armenian Relief, Inc. E-MAIL...garo@farusa.org 

German Marshall Fund of the United States, The (GMF) http://www.gmfus.org 

Global Assistance, Inc. (GAI) http://www.globalassistance.org 

Global Health Action, Inc. http://www.globalhealthaction.org 

Global Health Council, Inc. (GHC) www.globalhealth.org 

Global Health Ministries (GHM) http://www.ghm.org 

Global Impact, Inc. www.mindspring.com/~global_impact/h 

ome.htm 

Global Jewish Assistance and Relief Network (GJARN) www.globaljewish.org 

global links (gl) http://www.globallinks.org 

Global Operations and Development (GO&D) E-MAIL...global@snis.net 

Global Relief Foundation, Inc. (GRF) www.grf.org 

Goodwill Industries International, Inc. (GII) http://www.goodwill.org 

Goodwill Industries-Manasota, Inc. E-MAIL...dalbri@aol.com 

Grameen Foundation USA www.grameenfoundation.org 

Habitat for Humanity International, Inc. (HFHI) http://www.habitat.org 

Hadassah, The Women's Zionist Organization of America, Inc. 

(HWZOA) 

http://www.hadassah.org 

232 Appendix B-6 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Haitian Health Foundation, The (HHF) 97 Sherman Street, Norwich, CT 06360 

Hands to Clinical Labs of Third World Countries, Inc. (HCL) E-MAIL...hcl@aol.com 

Harry T. Fultz Albanian-American Educational Foundation, The E-MAIL...fultz2@earthlink.net 

Healing the Children Northeast, Inc. (HTCNE) http://www.htcne.org 

Health Alliance International (HAI) E-MAIL...hai@u.washington.edu 

Health and Education Volunteers, Inc. (HealthED) E-MAIL...health@usbnc.org 

Health Volunteers Overseas (HVO) http://www.hvousa.org 

Heart to Heart International, Inc. (H2H) http://www.hearttoheart.org 

Heifer Project International http://www.heifer.org/ 

Heifer Project International, Inc. (HPI) http://www.heifer.org 

Helen Keller International, Inc. (HKI) http://www.hki.org 

Help International, Inc. (HELP) E-MAIL...74617.1701@compuserve.com 

Hermandad, Inc. (Helping to Reach Many Through Direct 

Assistance in Development) 

http://www.hermandad.org 

Holt International Children's Services, Inc. (HICS) http://www.holtintl.org 

Hope International E-MAIL...hopeint@epix.net 

HOPE Worldwide, Ltd. http://www.hopeww.org 

Human Rights Watch http://www.hrw.org/ 

Humanity International, Inc. (HI) E-MAIL...humanity@oncon.com 

Hunger Project, The (THP) http://www.thp.org 

Imani House, Inc. (IHI) http://www.plenty.org/IMANI.html 

Impact Teams International (ITI) E-MAIL...impactteams@compuserve.com 

Impact With God Crusades, Inc. (IMPACT) E-MAIL...isohimp@aol.com 

Indigenous Peoples Media Network, Inc. E-MAIL...ipmn@xxicentury.org 

Institute for Democracy in Eastern Europe (IDEE) E-MAIL...idee@idee.org 

Institute for Development Research, Inc. (IDR) http://www.jsi.com/idr 

Institute for EastWest Studies (IEWS) http://www.iews.org 

Institute for Health Policy Analysis, Inc. (IHPA) E-MAIL...info@emep-online.org 

Institute for Multi-Track Diplomacy (IMTD) http://www.igc.org/imtd 

Institute for Practical Idealism (d/b/a Legacy International) http://www.legacyintl.org 

Institute for Transportation and Development Policy, The (ITDP) http://www.itdp.org 

Institute of Cultural Affairs (ICA) E-MAIL...icachicago@igc.org 

Institute of Global Communications (IGC Human Rights) http://www.igc.org/igc/gateway/index.ht 

ml 

Appendix B-6 233 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Institute of Global Communications (PeaceNet) http://www.igc.org/igc/gateway/pnindex 

.html 

Institute of International Education, Inc. (IIE) http://www.iie.org 

Interaction: Coalition of over 150 NGOs and PVOs for working for 

FHA 

www.interaction.org/ 

Inter-American Improvement Association, Inc. (IAIA) E-MAIL...mosesiaia@aol.com 

Interfaith Medical Assistance, Inc. (I.M.A.) http://www.interchurch.org 

International Aid, Inc. (IAI) http://www.internationalaid.org 

International Alliance for Children, Inc. (IAC) 2 Ledge Lane, New Milford, CT 06776 

International Book Bank, Inc., The (IBB) Ibbusa@worldnet.att.net 

International Book Project (IBP) E-MAIL...ibookp@iglou.com 

International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL) http://www.icnl.org 

International Center for Research on Women (ICRW) http://www.icrw.org 

International Center, The http://www.newforestsproject.com 

International Centre for Migration and Health 

ICMH was established in 1995 as part of a joint initiative by IOM, 

the University of Geneva, and WHO, and in response to the need 

for more research, policy and training in the area of migration and 

health. ICMH has been designated as a WHO Collaborating 

Centre for Health-related Issues Among People Displaced by 

Disasters. 

http://www.icmh.ch/ 

International Children's Heart Foundation (ICHF) http://www.babyhearts.com 

International Christian Adoptions (ICA, also d/b/a Institute For 

Children's Aid) 

www.4achild.com 

International City/County Management Association (ICMA) http://www.icma.org 

International Clinical Epidemiology Network (INCLEN, Inc.) http://www.inclen.org 

International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives U.S.A. 

(ICLEI-US) 

http://www.iclei.org 

International Council of Voluntary Agencies 

The International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA) functions 

as an advocacy network, adding value to the work of the nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) that form its membership. It 

ensures involved and informed NGO networks and facilitates a 

real 'policy to implementation' partnership between NGOs and 

international agencies. 

http://www.icva.ch/ 

International Crisis Group 

A private, multinational organization. Publishes many useful 

reports based on field research—teams of political analysts on 

the ground in countries at risk of crisis, gather information from a 

http://www.intl-crisis-group.org/ 

www.crisisweb.org 

234 Appendix B-6 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

wide range of sources, assess local conditions and produce 

regular analytical reports containing practical recommendations 

targeted at key international decision-takers. ICG's reports are 

distributed widely to officials in foreign ministries and international 

organisations and made available to the general public via the 

organisation's internet site. 

International Development Enterprises (IDE) http://www.ideorg.org 

International Executive Service Corps (IESC) http://www.iesc.org 

International Eye Foundation, Inc. (IEF) http://www.iefusa.org 

International Foundation for Education and Self-Help (IFESH) http://www.ifesh.org 

International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES) http://www.ifes.org 

International Heart of Variety (Variety Clubs International) E-MAIL...vci@interport.net 

International Human Rights Law Group, The (The Law Group) www.hrlawgroup.org 

International Institute for Energy Conservation (IIEC) http://www.iiec.org 

International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR) http://www.cav.pworld.net.ph/~iirr 

International Law Institute (ILI) http://www.ili.org 

International Medical Corps http://www.imc-la.com/ 

International Medical Corps, The (IMC) http://www.imc-la.org 

International Medical Services for Health (INMED) http://www.inmed.org 

International Orthodox Christian Charities, Inc. (IOCC) http://www.iocc.org 

International Partnership for Human Development (IPHD) E-MAIL...iphd@erols.com 

International Planned Parenthood Federation, Western 

Hemisphere Region (IPPF/WHR) 

E-MAIL...bcruz@ippfwhr.org 

International Relief and Development E-MAIL...akeys@clark.net 

International Relief Teams (IRT) www.irteams.org 

International Rescue Committee (IRC) http://www.intrescom.org 

International Rescue Corps http://www.intrescom.org/ 

International Service Agencies 

A coalition of US-based international relief and development 

organizations. 

http://www.charity.org/ 

International Service Center (ISC) http://members.aol.com/isc1976 

International Union for the Conservation of Nature & Natural 

Resources (IUCNUS) 

http://www.iucnus.org 

International Wilderness Leadership Foundation (WILD) http://www.wild.org 

International Women's Democracy Center www.iwdc.org 

International Youth Foundation (IYF) youth@iyfnet.org 

Interns for Peace, Inc. (IFP) http://www.internsforpeace.org/contact 

Appendix B-6 235 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Ipas, Inc. (International Projects Assistance Service) http://www.ipas.org 

ISAR, Inc. http://www.isar.org 

Islamic African Relief Agency, United States Affiliate (IARA-USA) http://www.iara-usa.org 

Island Resources Foundation, Inc. (IRF) http://www.irf.org 

Jane Goodall Institute for Wildlife Research, Education and 

Conservation (JGI) 

http://www.janegoodall.org 

Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Inc. (JCPES) http://www.jointcenter.org 

Junior Achievement International (JAI) http://www.jaintl.com 

Kaffa Development Associates (KDAUSA) E-MAIL...larcon@sni.net 

Katalysis Partnership, Incorporated (Katalysis) E-MAIL...katalysis2@aol.com 

Kids Around the World, Inc. (KIDS) E-MAIL...playgrounds@compuserve.com 

La Leche League International (LLLI) http://www.lalecheleague.org 

Landmine Survivors Network www.landminesurvivors.org 

Latin American and Caribbean Regional Disaster Information 

Center (CRID): initiative by 6 disaster relief organizations 

http://www.crid.or.cr/crid/Indexen.htm 

Latter-day Saint Charities (LDSC) lds-charities@ldschurch.org 

Laubach Literacy International www.laubach.org 

Life for Relief & Development (IRA) http://www.lifeusa.org 

Life Link, The E-MAIL...fcfintdir@aol.com 

Lifewater International http://www.lifewater.org 

Lighthouse International http://www.lighthouse.org 

Lithuanian Children's Relief, Inc. E-MAIL...taupa@juno.com 

Lithuanian Mercy Lift, Inc. (LML) E-MAIL...glendraitis@kiwi.dep.anl.gov 

Lutheran Social Services of Wisconsin and Upper Michigan, Inc. www.lsswis.org 

Lutheran World Relief http://www.lwr.org/ 

Lutheran World Relief, Inc. (LWR) http://www.lwr.org 

Magee-Womens Hospital (MWH) www.magee.edu 

Maine Adoption Placement Service (MAPS) http://www.mapsadopt.org 

Management Sciences for Health (MSH) www.msh.org 

Manomet, Inc. (Manomet) http://www.manomet.org 

MAP International, Inc. (MAP) http://www.map.org 

Maranatha Volunteers International, Inc. (MVI) http://www.maranatha.org 

Maternal Life International, Inc. www.usacares.org 

236 Appendix B-6 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Medical Benevolence Foundation (MBF) http://www.mbfoundation.org 

Medical Care Development, Inc. (MCDI) http://www.mcd.org 

Medical Outreach for Armenians, Inc. (MOA) 1101 East Broadway Avenue, No 103 

Glendale, CA 91205 

Medicine for Peace (MFP) E-MAIL...mviola@msn.com 

Medicins du Monde http://www.medecinsdumonde.org/ 

MEDISEND/International www.medisend.org 

Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc. (Melwood Training 

Center) 

http://www.melwood.com 

Mennonite Central Committee http://www.mcc.org/index.html 

Mennonite Economic Development Associates, The (MEDA) http://www.meda.org 

Merciful Samaritan, Inc. http://www.aone.com/~swelsh/mercy.html 

Mercy Corps International (MCI) http://www.mercycorps.org 

Mercy International USA, Inc. (Mercy) http://www.mercyusa.org 

Mercy Ships http://www.mercyships.org 

Miami Medical Team Foundation, Inc. (MMTF) 2340 Coral Way, Miami, FL 33145 

Mines Advisory Group http://www.oneworld.org/mag/framindx. 

htm 

Ministry of Jesus, Inc. (MOJ) E-MAIL...moj1@juno.com 

Minnesota International Health Volunteers (MIHV) E-MAIL...cporta@mihv.org 

Minority Rights Group International http://www.minorityrights.org/ 

Mission Without Borders International (MWBI) http://www.mwbi.org 

Missouri Botanical Garden (MOBOT) http://www.mobot.org 

Mobility International USA (MIUSA) http://www.miusa.org 

Mottahedeh Development Services (MDS) E-MAIL...mdssed@msn.com 

Mountain Institute, Inc., The (TMI) http://www.mountain.org 

National Alliance of Black School Educators (NABSE) http://www.nabse.org 

National Center for Nonprofit Boards (NCNB) http://www.ncnb.org 

National Cooperative Business Association (NCBA) http://www.cooperative.org 

National Council of Negro Women, Inc. (NCNW) www.ncnw.com 

National Council of the Young Men's Christian Association of the 

USA (YMCA of the USA) 

E-MAIL...kspencer@chicago.ymcausa.org 

National Cristina Foundation (NCF) http://www.cristina.org 

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) http://www.nfwf.org 

National Institute for Urban Search and Rescue http://niusr.org/ 

Appendix B-6 237 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

National Peace Corps Association (NPCA) http://www.rpcv.org 

National Policy Association (NPA) http://www.npa1.org 

National Rural Electric Cooperative Association - International 

Foundation (NRECA-IF) 

http://www.nreca.org 

National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) http://www.nreca.org 

National Telephone Cooperative Association (NTCA) http://www.ntca.org 

Nature Conservancy, The (TNC) www.tnc.org 

Nazarene Compassionate Ministries, Inc. (NCMI) www.nazarene.org/inc 

Nazarene Ministry of Help (NMH) E-MAIL...tanya@childrenhelp.org 

Near East Foundation (NEF) http://www.neareast.org 

Network for Healthcare and Rehabilitation Services, Inc. (INPB) 1845 Harvard Street NW, Suite 619 

Washington, DC 20009 

New Manna Ministries Outreach Association http://www.ieweb.com/newmanna 

New York Botanical Garden (NYBG) http://www.nybg.org 

Northwest Medical Teams International, Inc. (NWMTI) http://www.nwmti.org 

Ombudsmen for Humanitarian Assistance http://www.oneworld.org/ombudsman/ 

Operation Blessing International Relief and Development 

Corporation (OBI) 

http://www.ob.org 

Operation Bootstrap Africa (OBA) E-MAIL...bootstrapd@aol.com 

Operation California, Inc. (Operation USA) http://www.opusa.org 

Opportunities Industrialization Centers International, Inc. (OICI) http://www.oicinternational.org 

Opportunity International, Inc. http://www.opportunity.org 

ORA International www.orainternational.org 

Organization for Tropical Studies, Inc. (OTS) http://www.ots.duke.edu 

Organization of Humanitarian Service for Armenia 117 East Huntington Drive 

Arcadia, CA 91006 

Our Little Brothers and Sisters, Inc. (OLB&S) www.nphamigos.org 

Outreach International, Inc. (OI) http://www.outreach-international.org 

Oxfam http://oxfam.org.uk/ 

Pacific Disaster Management Information Network (PDMIN) 

Online library of links, publications, electronic journals; up-to-date 

information on disasters; country and cultural information; 

technology for DM personnel; and online educational and training 

materials for disaster management personnel. 

http://coe-dmha.org/website/index.htm 

Pan American Development Foundation (PADF) padf-dc@padf.org 

Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) http://www.paho.org/ 

238 Appendix B-6 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Park West Children's Fund, Inc. (PWCF, Friends Ship) www.friendships.org 

Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA) E-MAIL...parlglobal@aol.com 

Partners for Democratic Change (PDC) http://www.partners-intl.org 

Partners for Development (PFD) http://www.interaction.org/mb/pfd2.html 

Partners in Economic Reform, Inc. (PIER) 2000 L Street, N.W., Suite 200 

Washington, DC 20036 

Partners International Foundation http://www.partners-international.org 

Partners of the Americas (Partners) http://www.pathfind.org 

Pathologists Overseas E-MAIL...pathoverc@aol.com 

Pearl S. Buck International, Inc. (PSBF) http://www.pearl-s-buck.org 

PEOPLink http://www.peoplink.org 

Peregrine Fund, The http://www.peregrinefund.org 

Perkins School for the Blind http://www.perkins.pvt.k12.ma.us 

Phelps-Stokes Fund, The (PSF) http://www.psfdc.org 

Philippine American Foundation (PAF) E-MAIL...pafwash@aol.com 

Physicians Against Land Mines (PALM) http://www.banmines.org 

PLAN International USA, Inc. (d/b/a Childreach) http://www.childreach.org 

Planet Aid http://www.planetaid.org 

Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. (PPFA) http://www.ppfa.org 

Planned Parenthood of New York City, Inc. (Margaret Sanger 

Center International (MSCI), PPNYC) 

ppnyc@ppfa.org 

Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, Inc. (PPNNE) E-MAIL...judyw@ppnne.org 

Planning Assistance (PA) E-MAIL...planasst@igc.apc.org 

Points of Light Foundation (POLF) http://www.pointsoflight.org 

Polish American Congress Charitable Foundation (PACCF) http://www.polamcon.org 

Polus Center for Social and Economic Development, Inc. http://www.walkingunited.com 

Population Council http://www.popcouncil.org 

Population Services International (PSI) http://www.psiwash.org 

Premiere Urgence http://www.premiere-urgence.org/ 

Private Agencies Collaborating Together, Inc. (PACT) http://www.pactworld.org 

PRO Women (Programs for Women) E-MAIL...promujer@earthlink.com 

Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH) http://www.path.org 

Project Concern International (PCI) http://www.projectconcern.org 

Project Dawn, Inc. (Project Donors and Workers Now, Inc.) E-MAIL...hornec@stjoseph-candler.org 

Appendix B-6 239 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Project Hope http://www.projhope.org/ 

Project HOPE - The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc. 

(Project HOPE) 

http://www.projhope.org 

Project Mercy, Inc. E-MAIL...promer@gte.net 

Project Open Hearts (POH) http://www.poh.org 

Project ORBIS International, Inc. http://www.orbis.org 

Rainforest Alliance, Inc. (RAI) http://www.rainforest-alliance.org 

RARE Center for Tropical Conservation http://www.rarecenter.org 

Reach the Children Relief and Development, Inc. E-MAIL...jlekholm@aol.com 

Red Cross—International Committee of the Red Cross http://www.icrc.org/ 

Red Cross—International Federation of red Cross and Red 

Crescent Societies 

http://www.ifrc.org/ 

Red Cross—The American Red Cross http://www.redcross.org/ 

Refugees International http://www.refintl.org/ 

Registered Engineers for Disaster Relief 

RedR - an international NGO with offices in London, Canberra, 

Auckland and Geneva - relieves suffering in disasters by 

selecting, training and providing competent and effective 

personnel to humanitarian relief agencies world-wide. 

http://www.redr.org/ 

Relief International http://www.ri.org 

Relief Net: List of and links to various relief organizations http://www.reliefnet.org/ 

Rene Moawad Foundation (RMF) http://www.rmf.net 

Resource Foundation, Inc., The E-MAIL...resourcefnd@msn.com 

Rodale Institute (RI) E-MAIL...tfolk@rodaleinst.org 

Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, The (TRF) http://www.rotary.org 

Rural Enterprise Adaptation Program (REAP) www.reapintl.com 

Sabre Foundation, Inc. http://www.sabre.org 

Salesian Missions (SSI) http://www.salesianmissions.org 

Salvadoran American Health Foundation (SAHF) http://www.sahf.com 

Salvation Army World Service Office, The (SAWSO) sawso@usn.salvationarmy.org 

Samaritan's Purse (SPIR) http://www.samaritan.org 

Save the Children – UK http://193.129.255.93/ 

Save the Children – US http://www.savethechildren.org/ 

Save the Children Federation, Inc. (SC/US) http://www.savethechildren.org 

Search for Common Ground (SCG) http://www.sfcg.org 

240 Appendix B-6 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Seed Capital Development Fund, Ltd. (SCDF) E-MAIL...gil@seedcapital.org 

Seeds of Peace (SOP) http://www.seedsofpeace.org 

Self-Help International www.netins.net/showcase/selfhelp 

Seraphim Foundation, Inc. E-MAIL...seraphim@iamdigex.net 

Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S. 

(SIECUS) 

http://www.siecus.org 

Share and Care Foundation for India (Share & Care) 330 Momar Drive, Ramsey, NJ 07446 

Shelter Now International, Inc. (SNI) http://www.shelter.org 

Small Enterprise Assistance Funds (SEAF, formerly CARE Small 

Business Assistance Corporation) 

http://www.seafweb.org 

Small Enterprise Education and Promotion Network, The (SEEP) http://www.seepnetwork.org 

Solar Cookers International http://www.accessone.com/~sbcn 

Solidarites http://www.solidarites.org/ 

Soros Foundation http://www.soros.org/ 

South North Development Initiative, Inc. (SNDI) E-MAIL...sndi1@aol.com 

Sovereign Military Order of Malta, Federal Association, U.S.A. 

(SMOM) 

http://www.smom.org 

St. David's Relief Foundation (SDRF) http://www.stdavids.org 

Stop Hunger Now (SHN) http://www.stophungernow.com 

Strategies for International Development (SID) E-MAIL...sidwashdc@aol.com 

Summer Institute of Linguistics, Inc. (SIL, Inc.) http://www.sil.org 

Synergos Institute, The (SI) http://www.synergos.org 

TechnoServe, Inc. http://www.technoserve.org 

Teen Challenge International (TCI) E-MAIL...tciworld@flash.net 

Tera Foundation (TERA) tera@terafdn.org 

Trees for Life, Inc. (TFL) http://www.treesforlife.org 

Trickle Up Program http://www.trickleup.org 

U.S. Grains Council (USGC) http://www.grains.org 

U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, The (USUF) http://www.usukraine.org 

Ukimwi Orphans Assistance (UOA) E-MAIL...ukimwiorphans@yahoo.com 

Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, Inc. www.ucca.org 

United Armenian Fund, The (UAF) E-MAIL...mchalian@pacbell.net 

United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asia http://www.unitedboard.org 

United Israel Appeal, Inc. (UIA) E-MAIL...pam@uia.com 

United Methodist Committee on Relief http://gbgm-umc.org/units/umcor/ 

Appendix B-6 241 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Mitch Info: http://gbgmumc.org/storms/hmitch.html 

United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCOR) http://gbgm-umc.org/units/umcor 

United Palestinian Appeal, Inc. (UPA) E-MAIL...upa@cais.com 

United States Catholic Conference, Inc. - Migration and Refugee 

Services (MRSUSCC) 

http://www.nccbuscc.org 

United States National Committee for Pacific Economic 

Cooperation (US-PECC) 

http://www.pecc.org 

United Ukrainian American Relief Committee (UUARC) http://www.uuarc.org 

United Way International (UWI) http://www.uwint.org 

US Committee for Refugees http://www.refugees.org/ 

USA for UNHCR 

Private group of US citizens seeking to promote and assist 

UNHCR efforts. 

http://www.usaforunhcr.org/ 

Vellore Christian Medical College Board (USA), Inc. www.vellorecmc.org 

Viet-Nam Assistance for the Handicapped (VNAH) www.vnah.com 

Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation (VVAF, Veterans 

International (VI)) 

http://www.vvaf.org 

Village Enterprise Zone Associations International, Inc. (VEZA 

International) 

E-MAIL...vezaint@aol.com 

Voice of the Martyrs, The www.persecution.com 

Volunteers for Inter-American Development Assistance www.vidausa.org 

Volunteers in Technical Assistance (VITA) 

VITA defines its mission as empowering the poor in developing 

countries to manage their own development. 

http://www.vita.org/ 

Volunteers in Technical Assistance, Inc. (VITA) http://www.vita.org 

War Child http://www.warchild.org/ 

Water For People (WFP) http://www.waterforpeople.org 

Wellstart International (WSI) E-MAIL...antoriet@wellstart.org 

Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) http://www.wcs.org 

Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development (WI) http://www.winrock.org 

Wisconsin/Nicaragua Partners of the Americas, Inc. (W/NP) http://wnp.uwsp.edu 

Women for Women http://www.embassy.org/wmn4wmn 

World Association for Children and Parents (WACAP) http://www.wacap.org 

World Concern Development Organization (WCDO) http://www.worldconcern.org 

242 Appendix B-6 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

World Conference of Mayors, Inc., The (WCM) www.worldmayors.org 

World Council of Credit Unions, Inc. (WOCCU) http://www.woccu.org 

World Education, Inc. (WEI) http://www.worlded.org 

World Emergency Relief (WER) http://www.wer-us.org 

World Federation for Mental Health, Inc. (WFMH) http://www.wfmh.org 

World Health Emergency Medical Funds, Inc. (W.H.E.M.F.) .www.whemf.com 

World Help http://www.worldhelp.net 

World Hope International http://www.worldhope.net 

World Institute on Disability (WID) http://www.wid.org 

World Learning, Inc. (formerly Experiment in International Living) http://www.worldlearning.org 

World Rehabilitation Fund, Inc. (WRF) http://www.worldrehabfund.org 

World Relief Corporation of National Association of Evangelicals 

(WRC) 

http://www.worldrelief.org 

World Resources Institute (WRI) http://www.wri.org/wri 

World SHARE, Inc. (SHARE(Self-Help and Resources 

Exchange)) 

http://www.worldshare.org/ms 

World Vision, Inc. (WVUS) http://www.worldvision.org 

World Wildlife Fund, Inc. (WWF) http://www.worldwildlife.org 

WorldSpace Foundation www.worldspace.org 

Worldwide Humanitarian Aid, Inc. (WHA, Inc.) E-MAIL...wbarndt1@ix.netcom.com 

Zoological Society of Milwaukee County www.zoosociety.org 

Appendix B-6 243 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX C-1: EXCHANGE OF NOTES (DIPLOMATIC NOTES) -

NICARAGUA 

OTTUZYUW RUEUMVA3361 3312353-UUUU--RUEXCHR. 

ZNR UUUU ZZH 

0 272355Z NOV 98 

FM AMEMBASSY MANAGUA 

TO RUEHC/SZCSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATZ 0499 

INFO RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC//USDP/ISA/IA/FMRA// 

RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC 

RUMIAAA/USCINCSO MIAMI FL//SCJA// 

BT 

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 MANAGUA 003361 

E.O. 12958: NIA 

TAGS: MASS, MARR, PREL, EAID, KTIA, NU 

SUBJECT: EXCHANGE OF NOTES ON LEGAL PROTECTION FOR 

USFORCES PARTICIPATING IN DISASTER 

RELIEF OPERATIONS 

REF: STATE 207255 

I. FOLLOWING RECEIPT OF REFTEL, EMBASSY FORWARDED TEXT OF 

PROPOSED AGREEMENT TO THE MFA AS DIPNOTE 230 ON NOVEMBER 7. 

IN RESPONSE, THE MFA SENT US THEIR DIPNOTE 98/00676 ON NOVEMER 

25. INFORMAL TRANSLATION OF THE MFA'S DIPNOTE FOLLOWS. 

BEGIN INFORMAL TRANSLATION 

COMPLIMEMARY OPENING ... AND REFERS TO NOTE NO. 230 OF THE 

EMBASSY, WITH THE DATE OF NOVEMBER 7, 1998, THE TEXT OF WHICH 

IS CONTAINED BELOW: 

'COMPLIMENTARY OPENING ... AND HAS THE HONOR TO REFER TO 

RECENT DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN REPRESENTATIVES OF OUR TWO 

GOVERNMENTS REGARDING U.S. MILITARY AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL 

OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE WHO WILL BE PRESENT IN 

NICARACUA IN CONNECTZON WITH THE UPCOMING DISASTER 

RELIEF/ASSISTANCE EFFORT, AND ANY MUTUALLY AGREED FOLLOW-ON 

ACTIVITIES. 

AS A RESULT OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, THE EMBASSY HAS THE HONOR 

TO PROPOSE THAT SUCH PERSONNEL BE ACCORDED A STATUS 

EQUIVALENT TO THAT ACCORDZD TO ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL 

STAFF UNDER THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS 

OF APRIL 18, 1961. THE EMBASSY FURTHER PROPOSES 

244 Appendix C-1 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

THAT UNITED STATES MILITARY AM CIVILIAN PERSONNEL OF THE UNITID 

STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE MAY ENTER AND EXIT NICARAGUA 

WITH UNITED STATES IDENTIFICATION AND WITH COLLECTIVE 

MOVEMENT OR INDIVIDUAL TRAVEL ORDERS, THAT NICARAGUAN 

AUTHORITIES SMALL ACCEPT AS VALID, WITHOUT A 

DRIVING FEE OR TEST, DRIVING LICENSES OR PERMITS ISSUED BY THE 

APPROPRIATE UNITED STATES AUTHORITIES TO U.S. PERSONNEL FOR 

THE OPERATION OF VEHICLES; AND THAT MILITARY PERSONNEL BE 

AUTHORIZED TO WEAR UNIFORMS WHILE PERFORMING OFFICIAL 

DUTIES 

THE EMBASSY ALSO PROPOSES THAT THE GOVERNMENT FQ 

NICARAGUA ACCORD DUTY-FREE IMPORTATION AND EXPORTATION, AS 

WELL AS EXEMPTION FROM TAXATION 0N PRODUCTS, PROPERTY, 

MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES, VESSELS, AND AIRCRAFT IMPORTED 

INTO, ACQUIRED IN OR EXPORTED FROM NICARAGUA BY OR ON BEHALF 

OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OR ITS PERSONNEL IN 

CONNECTION WITH THEIR ACTIVITIES; AND THAT THE PARTIES SHALL 

COOPERATE IN TAKING SUCH STEPS AS SHALL BE NECESSARY TO 

INSURE THE SECURITY OF U.S. PERSONNEL AND PROPERTY IN 

NICARAGUA, 

THE EMBASSY FURTHER PROPOSES THAT VEHICLES, VESSELS, AND 

AIRCRAFT OWNED OR OPERATED BY OR FOR THE UNITED STATES 

ARMED FORCES SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE PAYMENT OF LANDING 

OR PORT FEES, PILOTAGE CHARGES, NAVIGATION, OVERFLIGHT OR 

PARKING CHARGES OR LIGHT OR HARBOR DUES WHILE IN NICARAGUA; 

HOWEVER, THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES SHALL PAY 

REASONABLE CHARGES FOR SSRVICES REQUESTED AND RECEIVED. 

FINALLY, THE EMBASSY PROPOSES THAT BOTH GOVERNMENTS SHALL 

WAIVE ANY AND ALL CLAIMS (OTHER THAN CONTRACTUAL CLAIMS) 

AGAINST EACH OTHER FOR PERSONNEL INJURY TO OR DEATH OF 

THEIR MILITARY OR CIVILIAN PERSONNEL, OR FOR DAMAGE, LOSS, OR 

DESTRUCTION OF THE OTHER'S MILITARY PROPERTY ARISING OUT OF 

THE ACTIVITIES UNDER THIS EXCHANGE OF NOTES. THE UNITED 

STATES GOVERNMENT SHALL PAY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNITED 

STATES LAW, FAIR AND REASONABLE COMPENSATION IN SETTLEMENT 

OF MERITORIOUS CLAIMS BY THIRD PARTIES ARISING OUT OF ACTS OR 

OMISSIONS OF UNITED STATES DEFENSE PERSONNEL, OR WHICH ARE 

OTHERWISE INCIDENT TO NON-COMBAT ACTIVITIES OF THE UNITED 

STATES ARMED FORCES UNDER THIS EXCHANGE OF NOTES. 

Appendix C-1 245 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS AS MAY BE NECESSARY SHALL BE 

ENTERED INTO BY THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES OF THE TWO 

GOVE-RNMENTS. 

IF THE FOREGOING IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF 

NICARAGUA, THE EMBASSY PROPOSES THAT THIS NOTE, TOGETHER 

WITH THE MINISTRY'S REPLY TO THAT EFFECT, SHALL CONSTITUTE AN 

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO GOVERNMENTS WHICH SHALL ENTER 

INTO FORCE ON THE DATE OF THE MINISTRY'S REPLY, AND SHALL 

REMAIN IN FORCE FOR THE DURATION OF THE CURRENT ACTIVITY AND 

ANY AGREED FOLLOW-ON ACTIVITIES. 

(COMPLIMENTARY CLOSE) 

WITH REGARD TO THIS MATTER, THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN RELATIONS 

HAS THE HONOR TO INFORM THE HONORABLE EMBASSY OF THE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THAT THE PROPOSALS CONTAINED IN 

NOTE NO. 230 OF THE EMBASSY, DATED NOVEMBER 7, 1998, ARE 

ACCEPTABLE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NICARAGUA, AND CONFIRMS 

THAT NOTE NO. 230 AND THIS NOTE RESPONDING TO IT WILL 

CONSTITUTE AN ACCORD BETWEEN THE TWO GOVERNMENTS, WHICH 

WILL ENTER INTO FORCE FROM TODAY AND WILL LAST FOR DURING 

THE PERIOD OF CURRENT ACTIVITIES OF EMERGENCY, 

RECONSTRUCTION AND TRANSFORMATION WHICH WILL BE 

UNDZRTAKEN IN RESPONSE TO THE DAMAGES CAUSED BY HURRICANE 

MITCH, AND CAN BE EXTENDED FOR ACTIVITIES SUBSEQUENTLY 

AGREED TO BY BOTH GOVERNMENTS. 

COMPLIMENTARY CLOSE. 

END INFORMAL TRANSLATION. 

2. AS REQUESTED IN RETTEL, THE ORIGINAL CON NOTE ADM A 

CERTIFIED COPY OP THE EmBAssy,s soTZ WILL BE SENT TO L/T. 

GVTIER"Z 

INT 

#3361 

NNM 

246 Appendix C-1 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX C-2: SEC. OF STATE INSTRUCTIONS ON DIPLOMATIC NOTES 

Appendix C-2 247
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

248 Appendix C-2
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix C-2 249
 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX C-3: GUATEMALA AGREEMENT
 

CTIA-NO: 3439.000 

REF-NO: UNTS: 262 UNTS 105 TIAS: TIAS 3283 UST: 6 UST 210~ 

TITLE: Agreement between the U.S. and Guatemala concerning Mutual 

Defense Assistance. Agreement signed at Guatemala City June 18, 

1955; Entered into force July 18, 1955. 

DATE:SIGNED June 18, 1955 INFORCE June 18, 1955 

LENGTH: 1989 words 

TEXT: 

The Government of the United States of America and the Government of the 

Republic of Guatemala: 

Conscious of their pledges under the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal 

Assistance and other international instruments to assist any American State 

subjected to an armed attack and to act together for the common defense and for 

the maintenance of the peace and security of the Western Hemisphere; 

Desiring to foster international peace and security within the framework of the 

Charter of the United Nations through measures which will further the ability of 

nations dedicated to the purposes and principles of the Charter to participate 

effectively in arrangements for individual and collective self-defense in support of 

those purposes and principles; 

Reaffirming their determination to give their full cooperation to the efforts to 

provide the United Nations with armed forces as contemplated by the Charter 

and to obtain agreement on universal regulation and reduction of armaments 

under adequate guarantee against violation; 

Taking into consideration the support that the Government of the United States of 

America has brought to these principles by enacting legislation which provides 

for the furnishing of military assistance to nations which have joined with it in 

collective security arrangements; 

Desiring to set forth the conditions which will govern the furnishing of such 

assistance by one Government to the other; 

Have agreed as follows: 

250 Appendix C-3 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Article I 

1. Each Government will make or continue to make available to the other, and to 

such additional governments as the parties hereto may in each case agree upon, 

such equipment, materials, services, or other military assistance as the 

Government furnishing such assistance may authorize and in accordance with 

such terms and conditions as may be agreed. The furnishing and use of any 

such assistance as may be authorized by either party hereto shall be consistent 

with the Charter of the United Nations under which each nation is obliged not 

to undertake any act of aggression against any other nation. Such assistance 

shall be so designed as to promote the defense of the Western Hemisphere and 

be in accordance with defense plans under which both Governments will 

participate in missions important to the defense of the Western Hemisphere. 

Assistance made available by the Government of the United States of America 

pursuant to this Agreement will be furnished under the provisions, and subject to 

all the terms, conditions and termination provisions of applicable United States 

legislation. The two Governments will, from time to time, negotiate detailed 

arrangements necessary to carry out the provisions of this paragraph. 

2. The Government of the Republic of Guatemala undertakes to make effective 

use of assistance received from the Government of the United States of America 

pursuant to this Agreement for the purpose of implementing defense plans, 

accepted by the two Governments, under which the two Governments will 

participate in missions important to the defense of the Western Hemisphere, and 

will not, without the prior agreement of the Government of the United States of 

America, devote such assistance to purposes other than those for which it was 

furnished. 

3. Arrangements will be entered into under which equipment and materials 

furnished pursuant to this Agreement and no longer required for the purposes for 

which it was originally made available (except equipment and materials furnished 

under terms requiring reimbursement) will be returned to the Government which 

furnished such assistance for appropriate disposition. 

4. In the common security interest each Government undertakes not to transfer 

to any person not an officer or employee or agent of such Government, or to any 

other Government, title to or possession of any equipment, materials, or services 

furnished under this Agreement without the prior agreement of the other 

Government. The transfer of equipment or materials on a reimbursable basis 

shall be in accordance with terms and conditions relating to such transfers which 

may be agreed to by the two Governments. 

5. The two Governments will establish procedures whereby the Government of 

the Republic of Guatemala will so deposit, segregate, or assure title to all funds 

allocated to or derived from any program of assistance undertaken by the 

Appendix C-3 251 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Government of the United States of America so that such funds shall not be 

subject to garnishment, attachment, seizure or other legal process by any 

person, firm, agency, corporation, organization or government, when in the 

opinion of the Government of the United States of America any such legal 

process would interfere with the attainment of the objectives of the said program 

of assistance. 

6. Each Government will take such security measures as may be agreed in each 

case between the two Governments in order to prevent the disclosure or 

compromise of classified military articles, services or information furnished by the 

other Government pursuant to this Agreement. 

Article II 

Each Government will take appropriate measures consistent with security to 

keep the public informed of operations under this Agreement. 

Article III 

The two Governments will, upon request of either of them, negotiate appropriate 

arrangements relating to the exchange of patent rights and technical information 

for defense in order to expedite such exchanges and at the same time protect 

private interests and maintain security safeguards. 

Article IV 

1. The Government of the Republic of Guatemala will from time to time make 

available to the Government of the United States of America quetzales in 

amounts to be agreed for the use of the latter Government for its administrative 

and operating expenditures in connection with carrying out the purposes of the 

Mutual Security Act of 1954. 

The two Governments will forthwith initiate discussions with a view to determining 

the amount of such quetzales and to agreeing upon arrangements for the 

furnishing of such quetzales. 

2. The Government of the Republic of Guatemala will, except as may otherwise 

be agreed, grant duty-free treatment and exemption from internal taxation upon 

importation or exportation to products, property, materials, or equipment imported 

into its territory in connection with this Agreement or any similar agreement 

between The United States of America and any other country receiving military 

assistance. 

3. The operations and expenditures effected in Guatemala by or on behalf of the 

Government of the United States for the common defense effort including those 

carried out as a consequence of any other foreign aid program will be relieved 

252 Appendix C-3 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

from all taxation. To this end the Government of the Republic of Guatemala will 

prescribe pertinent procedures satisfactory to both Governments. 

Article V 

1. Each Government will receive personnel of the other Government who will 

discharge responsibilities of the other Government in connection with the 

implementation of this Agreement. Such personnel will be accorded facilities for 

continuous observation and review of programs of assistance under this 

Agreement, including the utilization of any such assistance. Such personnel who 

are national of that other country, including personnel temporarily assigned, will, 

in their relations with the Government of the country to which they are assigned, 

operate as a part of the Embassy under the direction and control of the Chief of 

the Diplomatic Mission of the Government of the sending country, and shall be 

accorded all privileges and immunities conferred by international custom to 

Embassy personnel of corresponding rank. Privileges and courtesies incident to 

diplomatic status, such as diplomatic automobile license plates, inclusion on the 

"diplomatic list", and social courtesies may be waived by the sending 

Government for its personnel other than the senior military member and the 

senior Army, Navy and Air Force officer and their respective immediate deputies. 

2. The two Governments will negotiate arrangements for classification of 

personnel and for appropriate notification thereof to the host Government. 

3. The Government of the Republic of Guatemala will grant, upon request of the 

Chief of the Diplomatic Mission of the Government of the United States, 

exemption from import and export duties on articles imported for the personal 

use of such personnel and of members of their families and will take adequate 

administrative measures to facilitate and expedite the importation and exportation 

of the personal property of such individuals and their families. 

Article VI 

Existing arrangements relating to Armed Forces missions of the United States of 

America established under other instruments are not affected by this Agreement 

and will remain in full force. 

Article VII 

In the interest of their mutual security, the two Governments will cooperate in 

measures designed to control trade with nations which threaten the security of 

the Western Hemisphere. 

Article VIII 

The two Governments reaffirm their determination to join in promoting 

international understanding and goodwill and maintaining world peace, to take 

Appendix C-3 253 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

such action as may be mutually agreed upon to eliminate causes of international 

tension, and to fulfill the military obligations assumed under multilateral or 

bilateral agreements and treaties to which both are parties. The Government of 

the Republic of Guatemala will, consistent with its political and economic stability, 

make the full contribution permitted by its manpower, resources, facilities and 

general economic condition to the development and maintenance of its own 

defensive strength and the defensive strength of the free world, and will take all 

reasonable measures which may be needed to develop its defense capacities. 

Article IX 

Whereas this Agreement has been negotiated and concluded on the basis that 

the Government of the United States of America will extend to the other party 

thereto the benefits of any provision in a similar agreement concluded by the 

Government of the United States of America with any other American Republic, it 

is understood that the Government of the United States of America will interpose 

no objection to amending this Agreement in order that its provisions may 

conform, in whole or in part, to the corresponding provisions of any similar 

Military Assistance Agreement, or agreements amendatory thereto, concluded 

with an American Republic. 

Article X 

1. This Agreement shall enter into force on the date of signature, and shall 

continue in force until one year after the receipt by either party of written notice of 

the intention of the other party to terminate it, except that the provisions of Article 

I, paragraphs 2 and 4 and arrangements made pursuant to the provisions of 

Article 1, paragraphs 3, 5 and 6 and of Article III shall remain in force unless 

otherwise agreed by the two Governments. 

2. The two Governments shall, upon the request of either of them, consult 

regarding any matter relating to the application or amendment of this Agreement. 

3. This Agreement shall be registered with the Secretary General of the United 

Nations. 

DONE at Guatemala City in duplicate in the Spanish and English languages, 

both equally authentic, on the eighteenth day of June 1955. 

FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THOMAS 

C. MANN, Thomas C. Mann, Charg' Affairs a. i. of the United States of America 

FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GUATEMALA RICARDO 

QUINEZ L, Ricardo Quinez L., Secretary General of the Presidency and Charg of 

the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. 

254 Appendix C-3 
HONDURAS

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX C-4: HONDURAN EXCHANGE OF NOTES AND CRIMINAL 

JURISDICTION PROTOCOL 

CONTENTS: 

1. Exchange of Notes - privileges and immunities, dated 8 Dec 82 (TIAS 10890). 

2. Protocol - criminal jurisdiction, dated 20 May 85 (TIAS 11256) and Annex - US 

military and civilian personnel not covered by protocol. 

Appendix C-4 255 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

TIAS 10890
 

HONDURAS
 

Defense: Privileges and Immunities
 

Agreement effect by exchange of notes 

Signed at Tegucigalpa December 8, 1982; 

Entered into force December 8, 1982. 

256 Appendix C-4 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

The American Charge d'Affaires ad interim to the Honduran Minister of 

Foreign Relations 

EMBASSY OF THE
 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

Tegucigalpa, D.C., December 8, 1982
 

No. 227 

Excellency: 

I have the honor to refer to recent discussions between our two 

Governments concerning military exercises in Honduras conducted by the 

combined Armed Forces of our two Governments. 

I wish to confirm our understanding that military and civilian personnel of the 

United States Armed Forces who participate in such combined military exercises in 

Honduras are discharging responsibilities in implementation of the Bilateral Military 

Assistance Agreement between our two Governments of May 20, l954.1 

Accordingly, such personnel shall be accorded the privileges, immunities and 

treatment described in Article V of that Agreement. Furthermore, I also wish to 

confirm that my Government agrees to waive for such personnel those courtesies 

provided for in Article V of the 1954 Agreement relating to the diplomatic list, 

diplomatic automobile license plates and comparable social courtesies. 

If this understanding meets with your approval, I propose that this note 

together with your note of acceptance shall constitute an agreement between our 

two Governments which shall enter into force on the date of your reply. 

Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my highest esteem. 

His Excellency Shepard C. Lowman 

Dr. Edgardo Paz Bamica Charge d'Affaires ad interim 

Minister of Foreign Relations of the 

Republic of Honduras 

Tegulcigalpa, D.C. 

1

 TIAS 2975; 5 UST 843 

Appendix C-4 257 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

TRANSLATION 

Republic of Honduras 

Department of Foreign Relations 

No. 1121-DSM Tegucigalpa, D.C., 

8 December, 1982 

Sir: 

I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your note No. 227 of today's date, 

referring to military exercises in Honduras conducted by the combined Armed Forces 

of our two Governments. 

I take pleasure in informing you that my Government is also of the 

understanding that military and civilian personnel of the United States Armed Forces 

who participate in such combined military exercises in Honduras do so in 

implementation of the Bilateral Military Assistance Agreement between our two 

Governments of May 70, 1954. Accordingly, such personnel shall be accorded the 

privileges, immunities, and treatment described in Article V of that Agreement. I note 

as well that your Government agrees to waive for such personnel those courtesies 

provided for in Article V of the 1954 Agreement relating to the diplomatic list, 

diplomatic license plates, and comparable courtesies. 

It is also understood that this acceptance constitutes an agreement between our 

two Governments which shall enter into force on today's date. 

I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to you the assurances of my highest 

consideration. 

[Signature] 

[SEAL] Edgardo Paz Barnica 

Minister 

The Honorable 

Shepard C. Lowman, 

Charge d'Affaires, 

Embassy of the United States of America, 

Tegucigalpa 

258 Appendix C-4 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

HONDURAS 

TIAS 11256 

DEFENSE: Criminal Jurisdiction 

Protocol Relating to the agreement of May 20, 1954.
 

Signed at Washington May 20, 1985;
 

Entered into force April 9, 1987.
 

Appendix C-4 259 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

PROTOCOL I
 

TO THE BILATERAL MILITARY ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
 

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

AND
 

THE GOVERNMENT OF HONDURAS
 

SIGNED 20 MAY 1954,[2]
 

CONCERNING THE
 

EXERCISE OF CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OVER
 

UNITED STATES PERSONNEL PRESENT IN HONDURAS
 

The Government of the United States of America and the Government of 

Honduras, have agreed as follows: 

1. As used in this Protocol, the term “United States personnel” means the military 

and civilian personnel of the United States armed forces temporarily present in 

Honduras for the purpose of participating in military exercises, or for other 

temporary purposes, authorized by the Government of Honduras. Within this 

definition: 

A. The term “military personnel” refers to military members of the United 

States Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Air Force. 

B. The term “civilian personnel” refers to individuals accompanying and 

employed by the United States armed forces. 

2. United States personnel shall respect the laws in force in Honduras and refrain 

from any activity inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the 1954 Mutual 

Assistance Agreement and this Protocol, and in particular from any political 

activity. The United States will take appropriate measures to this end. 

3. Subject to the provisions of this Protocol, 

A. The authorities of Honduras shall have jurisdiction over United States 

personnel in Honduras with respect to offenses committed within Honduras and 

punishable under the law of Honduras. 

B. United States authorities shall have the right to exercise within 

Honduras all criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction conferred on them by United 

States law over United States personnel. 

4. The authorities of the United States and the authorities of Honduras shall have 

the right to exercise jurisdiction over United States personnel in accordance with 

the following rules: 

A. The authorities of Honduras shall have exclusive jurisdiction over 

United States personnel with respect to offenses, including offenses relating to 

security, punishable under the law of Honduras, but not under the law of the 

United States. 

2

 TIAS 2975; 5 UST 843 - not transcribed 

260 Appendix C-4 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

B. United States authorities shall have the right to exercise exclusive 

jurisdiction over United States personnel with respect to offenses. including 

offenses relating to security, punishable under the law of the United States, but 

not under the law of Honduras. 

C. For the purposes of this paragraph and paragraph 5, an offense 

relating to security means: 

i. Treason; 

ii. Sabotage, espionage or violation of any law relating to national 

defense or national security information, or any other crime against national 

security codified or specifically identified in the respective laws of both States. 

5. In cases where the right to exercise jurisdiction is concurrent, the following 

rules shall apply: 

A. United States authorities shall have the primary right to exercise 

jurisdiction over United States personnel in relation to: 

i. Offenses solely against the property or security of the Untied 

States or offenses solely against the person or property of United States 

personnel: 

ii. Any illegal acts or omissions arising out of the performance of 

official duty. 

B. In the case of any other offense, the authorities of Honduras shall have 

the primary right to exercise jurisdiction. 

C. The authorities of either Government may request the authorities of the 

other Government to waive its primary right to exercise jurisdiction in a particular 

case. The government of Honduras shall exercise its primary right of jurisdiction 

in those cases it determines to be of exceptional importance, and only if it so 

notifies United States authorities within 15 days of the discovery of the alleged 

offense giving rise to such a case. 

D. In those cases in which a State does not exercise its primary right of 

jurisdiction. in accordance with paragraph 5.C., it may appoint an observer who 

will be present during the trial of an accused. 

E. When an illegal act or omission arises out of the performance of official 

duty, the competent United States authority shall issue a certificate to this effect. 

The Government of Honduras shall consider this certificate as sufficient proof for 

the purpose of paragraph 5.A.ii. of this Protocol. However, the Government of 

Honduras may request, within ten days from the receipt of this certificate, a 

review of the issuance of the certificate by the appropriate military authorities of 

the two governments. This review shall be completed within ten days from the 

receipt of the request. 

6. A. Within the scope of their legal competence, the authorities of Honduras 

and the United States shall assist each other in the arrest of United States 

personnel and in handing them over to the authorities who are to exercise 

jurisdiction in accordance with the provisions of this Protocol. 

B. The authorities of Honduras shall promptly notify the authorities of the 

United States of the arrest or detention of United States personnel. 

Appendix C-4 261 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

C. The custody of any United States personnel over whom the authorities 

of Honduras are to exercise jurisdiction shall reside with United States authorities 

from the commission of the offense until the completion of all investigative and 

judicial proceedings. United States authorities shall, upon the request of the 

authorities of Honduras, and without delay, make such a person available to 

those authorities for the purpose of any investigation or judicial proceeding 

associated with the offense with which the accused has been charged. 

7. A. Within the scope of their legal competence, the authorities of the United 

States and Honduras shall assist each other in the carrying out of all necessary 

investigations into offenses and shall cooperate in providing for the attendance of 

witnesses and in the collection and production of evidence, including the seizure 

and, in proper cases, the handing over of objects connected with an offense. 

B. The authorities of the United States and of Honduras shall notify one 

another of the disposition of all cases in which there are concurrent rights to 

exercise jurisdiction. 

8. A. When an accused has been tried in accordance with the provisions of 

this Protocol and has been acquitted or has been convicted and is serving, or 

has served, his sentence. or has had his sentence remitted or suspended, or 

when he has been pardoned, he may not be tried again for the same offense 

within Honduras. Nothing in this paragraph shall, however, prevent the military 

authorities of the United States from trying United States military personnel for 

any violation of rules of discipline arising from the act or omission which 

constituted an offense for which he was tried by the authorities of Honduras. 

B. United States authorities may not carry out a death sentence within 

Honduras. 

9. When United States personnel are detained, are in custody, or are being 

prosecuted by the authorities of Honduras, they shall be accorded all procedural 

safeguards established by the law of Honduras. Such procedural safeguards 

shall include the right: 

A. to have a prompt and speedy trial; 

B. to be informed in advance of trial of the specific charge or charges 

made against them, and to have a reasonable time to prepare their defense; 

C. to be confronted with witnesses against them; 

D. to present evidence in their defense, including legal process to compel 

witnesses to appear if such witnesses are within the jurisdiction of Honduras; 

E. to have legal representation of their own choice at every stage of 

investigation and for their defense and, if appropriate under Honduran law, to 

have free legal representation; 

F. to have the services of a competent interpreter, if necessary; 

G. to communicate with a representative of the United States and to have 

a representative of the United States present at their trial. This trial shall be 

public, unless the court, in accordance with the law of Honduras, excludes 

persons whose presence at the trial is not necessary; 

262 Appendix C-4 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

H. not to be found guilty of an offense on account of any act or omission 

which did not constitute an offense under the law of Honduras at the time it was 

committed; 

I. to be presumed innocent, until proven guilty; 

J. to be protected from the use of a confession obtained by illegal or 

improper means; 

K. not to be compelled to testify against or otherwise incriminate 

themselves; 

L. since the right of defense is inviolable, not to be tried or convicted if 

mentally or physically unfit to participate in their defense; 

M. not to be tried or convicted more than once for the same offense; 

N. to appeal a conviction or sentence in those cases in which they have 

been declared guilty; 

O. to have credited to any sentence of confinement their period of pretrial 

detention by either State; and, 

P. to be visited regularly by members of their immediate families and 

representatives of the United States 

10. United States Personnel serving sentences in Honduras shall have the right 

to visits and material assistance. 

11. United States personnel shall be subject to trial only by Honduran courts of 

ordinary jurisdiction. Such personnel shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of 

Honduran military courts, even during a state of siege. 

12. A. United States military police may take all appropriate measures with 

respect to United States military personnel necessary to ensure the maintenance 

of order and security on Honduran military facilities to which such personnel have 

been granted access. 

B. Outside such facilities, military police shall be employed only subject to 

prior arrangements with appropriate Honduran authorities and only in so far as 

such employment is necessary to maintain order and discipline among United 

States military personnel. 

13. For purposes of criminal jurisdiction, this Protocol supersedes the Exchange 

of Notes of December 8, 1982, regarding military exercises in Honduras.3 

United States military and civilian personnel in Honduras not covered by this 

Protocol are listed in the Annex hereto. 

14. This Protocol shall enter into force through an exchange of diplomatic notes 

confirming that both Governments have completed their respective internal 

procedures.4 

3

 TIAS 190890 

4

 Apr. 9, 1987 

Appendix C-4 263 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being duly authorized by their 

respective governments, have signed this Protocol. 

DONE at Washington, this 20th day of May, 1985, in duplicate, in the English and 

Spanish languages, both texts being equally authentic. 

FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: HONDURAS: 

John D. Negroponte Roberto Suazo 

264 Appendix C-4 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

ANNEX 

United States military and civilian personnel in Honduras not covered by 

Protocol I to the 1954 Military Assistance Agreement are as follows: 

1-- United States Defense attaches, and other personnel attached to the United 

States Defense Attache Office*;
 

2-- Marine guards of the United States Embassy *;
 

3-- Personnel assigned to the United States Military Group;
 

4-- Personnel attached to the United States Military Group to assist in performing
 

its functions; and
 

5-- Personnel present in Honduras in connection with the United States security
 

assistance program, under the direction of the United States Military Group, as 

agreed with the Government of Honduras. 

*Status derives from 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.5 

5

 TIAS 7502; 23 UST 3227. 

Appendix C-4 265 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-1: DRAWDOWN AUTHORITY 1 

266 Appendix D-1
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-2: DRAWDOWN AUTHORITY 2 

Appendix D-2 267
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-3: NEW PROCUREMENT 

268 Appendix D-3
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix D-3 269
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-4: WITHDRAWAL OF OHDACA FUNDS 

270 Appendix D-4
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix D-4 271
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-5: CONTINGENCY OPERATION DESIGNATION 

272 Appendix D-5
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix D-5 273
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-6: EXECUTIVE ORDER 12966, FOREIGN DISASTER 

ASSISTANCE 

EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 12966. FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE
 

Ex. Ord. No. 12966, July 14, 1995, 60 F.R. 36949, provided:
 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution
 

and the laws of the United States of America, including the
 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995, Public
 

Law 103-337 (the ''Act'') (see Tables for classification) and
 

section 301 of title 3, United States Code, it is hereby ordered
 

as follows:
 

Section 1. This order governs the implementation of section 404
 

of title 10, United States Code, as added by amendment set forth
 

in section 1412(a) of the Act. Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 404(a), the
 

Secretary of Defense is hereby directed to provide disaster
 

assistance outside the United States to respond to manmade or
 

natural disasters when the Secretary of Defense determines that
 

such assistance is necessary to prevent loss of lives. The
 

Secretary of Defense shall exercise the notification functions
 

required of the President by 10 U.S.C. 404(c).
 

Sec. 2. The Secretary of Defense shall provide disaster
 

assistance only:
 

(a) at the direction of the President; or
 

(b) with the concurrence of the Secretary of State; or
 

(c) in emergency situations in order to save human lives, where
 

there is not sufficient time to seek the prior initial
 

concurrence of the Secretary of State, in which case the
 

Secretary of Defense shall advise, and seek the concurrence of,
 

the Secretary of State as soon as practicable thereafter.
 

For the purpose of section 2(b) of this order, only the Secretary
 

of State, or the Deputy Secretary of State, or persons acting in
 

those capacities, shall have the authority to withhold
 

concurrence. Concurrence of the Secretary of State is not
 

required for the execution of military operations undertaken
 

pursuant to, and consistent with, assistance provided in
 

accordance with parts (b) and (c) of this section, or with
 

respect to matters relating to the internal financial processes
 

of the Department of Defense.
 

Sec. 3. In providing assistance covered by this order, the
 

Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Administrator of the
 

Agency for International Development, in the Administrator's
 

capacity as the President's Special Coordinator for International
 

Disaster Assistance.
 

Sec. 4. This order does not affect any activity or program
 

authorized under any other provision of law, except that referred
 

to in section 1 of this order.
 

274 Appendix D-6 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-7: 10 USC SEC. 127, EMERGENCY AND EXTRAORDINARY 

EXPENSES 

10 USC Sec. 127 01/05/99
 

TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
 

Subtitle A - General Military Law
 

PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
 

CHAPTER 3 - GENERAL POWERS AND FUNCTIONS
 

Sec. 127. Emergency and extraordinary expenses
 

(a) Subject to the limitations of subsection (c), and within the
 

limitation of appropriations made for the purpose, the Secretary
 

of Defense, the Inspector General of the Department of Defense,
 

and the Secretary of a military department within his department,
 

may provide for any emergency or extraordinary expense which
 

cannot be anticipated or classified. When it is so provided in
 

such an appropriation, the funds may be spent on approval or
 

authority of the Secretary concerned or the Inspector General for
 

any purpose he determines to be proper, and such a determination
 

is final and conclusive upon the accounting officers of the
 

United States. The Secretary concerned or the Inspector General
 

may certify the amount of any such expenditure authorized by him
 

that he considers advisable not to specify, and his certificate
 

is sufficient voucher for the expenditure of that amount.
 

(b) The authority conferred by this section may be delegated by
 

the Secretary of Defense to any person in the Department of
 

Defense, by the Inspector General to any person in the Office of
 

the Inspector General, or by the Secretary of a military
 

department to any person within his department, with or without
 

the authority to make successive redelegations.
 

(c)(1) Funds may not be obligated or expended in an amount in
 

excess of $500,000 under the authority of subsection (a) or (b)
 

until the Secretary of Defense has notified the Committee on
 

Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate
 

and the Committee on National Security and the Committee on
 

Appropriations of the House of Representatives of the intent to
 

obligate or expend the funds, and ­

(A) in the case of an obligation or expenditure in excess of
 

$1,000,000, 15 days have elapsed since the date of the
 

notification; or
 

(B) in the case of an obligation or expenditure in excess of
 

$500,000, but not in excess of $1,000,000, 5 days have elapsed
 

since the date of the notification.
 

Appendix D-7 275 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(2) Subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) shall not apply to
 

an obligation or expenditure of funds otherwise covered by such
 

subparagraph if the Secretary of Defense determines that the
 

national security objectives of the United States will be
 

compromised by the application of the subparagraph to the
 

obligation or expenditure. If the Secretary makes a determination
 

with respect to an obligation or expenditure under the preceding
 

sentence, the Secretary shall immediately notify the committees
 

referred to in paragraph (1) that such obligation or expenditure
 

is necessary and provide any relevant information (in classified
 

form, if necessary) jointly to the chairman and ranking minority
 

member (or their designees) of such committees.
 

(3) A notification under paragraph (1) and information referred
 

to in paragraph (2) shall include the amount to be obligated or
 

expended, as the case may be, and the purpose of the obligation
 

or expenditure.
 

(d) In any case in which funds are expended under the authority
 

of subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary of Defense shall submit
 

a report of such expenditures on a quarterly basis to the
 

Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations
 

of the Senate and the Committee on National Security and the
 

Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
 

-SOURCE­

(Added Pub. L. 94-106, title VIII, Sec. 804(a), Oct. 7, 1975, 89
 

Stat. 538, Sec. 140; amended Pub. L. 98-94, title XII, Sec.
 

1268(2), Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 705; renumbered Sec. 127 and
 

amended Pub. L. 99-433, title I, Sec. 101(a)(3), 110(d)(4), Oct.
 

1, 1986, 100 Stat. 994, 1002; Pub. L. 103-160, div. A, title III,
 

Sec. 361, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1627; Pub. L. 103-337, div. A,
 

title III, Sec. 378, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2737; Pub. L. 104­

106,
 

div. A, title IX, Sec. 915, title XV, Sec. 1502(a)(5), Feb. 10,
 

1996, 110 Stat. 413, 502.)
 

-MISC1­

AMENDMENTS
 

1996 - Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 915(2), added subsec.
 

(c). Former subsec. (c) redesignated (d). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec.
 

1502(a)(5), substituted ''Committee on Armed Services and the
 

Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on
 

National Security and the Committee on
 

Appropriations of'' for ''Committees on Armed Services and
 

Appropriations of the Senate and''. Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 104-106,
 

Sec. 915(1), redesignated subsec. (c), as amended by Pub. L. 104­

106, Sec. 1502(a)(5), 1506, as (d).
 

1994 - Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103-337 struck out par. (1)
 

designation before ''In any case'' and struck out par. (2) which
 

read as follows: ''The amount of funds expended by the Inspector
 

General of the Department of Defense under subsections (a) and
 

(b) during a fiscal year may not exceed $400,000.''
 

1993 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103-160, Sec. 361(1), inserted '',
 

the Inspector General of the Department of Defense,'' after ''the
 

276 Appendix D-7 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Secretary of Defense'' and ''or the Inspector General'' after
 

''the Secretary concerned'' and after ''The Secretary
 

concerned''. Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 103-160, Sec. 361(2), inserted
 

'', by the Inspector General to any person in the Office of the
 

Inspector
 

General,'' after ''the Department of Defense''. Subsec. (c). Pub.
 

L. 103-160, Sec. 361(3), designated existing provisions as par.
 

(1) and added par. (2).
 

1986 - Pub. L. 99-433 renumbered section 140 of this title as
 

this section and substituted ''Emergency'' for ''Emergencies'' in
 

section catchline.
 

1983 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 98-94 struck out ''of this section''
 

after ''subsection (c)''. Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 98-94 struck out
 

''of this section'' after
 

''subsections (a) and (b)''.
 

-CHANGECHANGE OF NAME
 

Committee on National Security of House of Representatives
 

changed to Committee on Armed Services of House of
 

Representatives by House Resolution No. 5, One Hundred Sixth
 

Congress, Jan. 6, 1999.
 

-MISC4­

CONSTRUCTION AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF DEFENSE UNDER DECLARATION
 

OF WAR OR NATIONAL EMERGENCY
 

Pub. L. 97-99, title IX, Sec. 903, Dec. 23, 1981, 95 Stat. 1382,
 

which authorized the Secretary of Defense, in the event of a
 

declaration of war or the declaration of a national emergency by
 

the President, to undertake military construction without regard
 

to any other provisions of law, was repealed and restated as
 

section 2808 of this title by Pub. L. 97-214, Sec. 2(a), 7(18),
 

July 12, 1982, 96 Stat. 157, 174, effective Oct. 1, 1982.
 

Appendix D-7 277 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-8: 10 USC SEC. 166A, COMBATANT COMMANDS:
 

FUNDING THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN OF JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
 

10 USC Sec. 166a 01/05/99
 

TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
 

Subtitle A - General Military Law
 

PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
 

CHAPTER 6 - COMBATANT COMMANDS
 

Sec. 166a. Combatant commands: funding through the Chairman of
 

Joint Chiefs of Staff
 

(a) CINC Initiative Fund. - From funds made available in any
 

fiscal year for the budget account in the Department of Defense
 

known as the ''CINC Initiative Fund'', the Chairman of the Joint
 

Chiefs of Staff may provide funds to the commander of a combatant
 

command, upon the request of the commander, or, with respect to a
 

geographic area or areas not within the area of responsibility of
 

a commander of a combatant command, to an officer designated by
 

the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for such purpose. The
 

Chairman may provide such funds for any of the activities named
 

in subsection (b).
 

(b) Authorized Activities. - Activities for which funds may be
 

provided under subsection (a) are the following:
 

(1) Force training.
 

(2) Contingencies.
 

(3) Selected operations.
 

(4) Command and control.
 

(5) Joint exercises (including activities of participating
 

foreign countries).
 

(6) Humanitarian and civil assistance.
 

(7) Military education and training to military and related
 

civilian personnel of foreign countries (including
 

transportation, translation, and administrative expenses).
 

(8) Personnel expenses of defense personnel for bilateral or
 

regional cooperation programs.
 

(9) Force protection.
 

278 Appendix D-8 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

(c) Priority. - The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in
 

considering requests for funds in the CINC Initiative Fund,
 

should give priority consideration to ­

(1) requests for funds to be used for activities that would
 

enhance the war fighting capability, readiness, and
 

sustainability of the forces assigned to the commander requesting
 

the funds; and
 

(2) the provision of funds to be used for activities with respect
 

to an area or areas not within the area of responsibility of a
 

commander of a combatant command that would reduce the threat to,
 

or otherwise increase, the national security of the United
 

States.
 

(d) Relationship to Other Funding. - Any amount provided by the
 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during any fiscal year out
 

of the CINC Initiative Fund for an activity referred to in
 

subsection (b)shall be in addition to amounts otherwise available
 

for that activity for that fiscal year.
 

(e) Limitations. - (1) Of funds made available under this section
 

for any fiscal year ­

(A) not more than $7,000,000 may be used to purchase items with
 

a unit cost in excess of $15,000;
 

(B) not more than $1,000,000 may be used to pay for any expenses
 

of foreign countries participating in joint exercises as
 

authorized by subsection (b)(5); and
 

(C) not more than $2,000,000 may be used to provide military
 

education and training (including transportation, translation,
 

and administrative expenses) to military and related civilian
 

personnel of foreign countries as authorized by subsection
 

(b)(7).
 

(2) Funds may not be provided under this section for any activity
 

that has been denied authorization by Congress.
 

(f) Inclusion of NORAD. - For purposes of this section, the
 

Commander, United States Element, North American Aerospace
 

Defense Command shall be considered to be a commander of a
 

combatant command.
 

-SOURCE­

(Added Pub. L. 102-190, div. A, title IX, Sec. 902(a), Dec. 5,
 

1991, 105 Stat. 1450; amended Pub. L. 102-396, title IX, Sec.
 

9128, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1935; Pub. L. 102-484, div. A,
 

title IX, Sec. 934, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2477; Pub. L. 103­

35, title II, Sec. 201(a), May 31, 1993, 107 Stat. 97; Pub. L.
 

105-85, div. A, title IX, Sec. 902, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat.
 

1854.)
 

-MISC1­

AMENDMENTS
 

1997 - Subsec. (b)(9). Pub. L. 105-85 added par. (9).
 

Appendix D-8 279 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

1993 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103-35, Sec. 201(a)(1), substituted
 

''the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff may provide funds to
 

the commander of a combatant command, upon the request of the
 

commander, or, with respect to a geographic area or areas not
 

within the area of responsibility of a commander of a combatant
 

command, to an officer designated by the Chairman of the Joint
 

Chiefs of Staff for such purpose'' for ''the Chairman of the
 

Joint Chiefs of Staff may provide funds to the commander of a
 

combatant command, upon the request of the commander, or to the
 

Director of the Joint Staff with respect to an area or areas not
 

within the area of responsibility of a commander of a combatant
 

command.'' Subsec. (b)(7). Pub. L. 103-35, Sec. 201(a)(2), struck
 

out second of two identical parenthetical phrases at end of par.
 

(7) which read as follows: ''(including transportation,
 

translation, and administrative expenses)''.
 

1992 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 102-484, Sec. 934(a), which directed
 

substitution of ''funds to the commander of a combatant command,
 

upon the request of the commander, or, with respect to a
 

geographic area or areas not within the area of responsibility of
 

a commander of a combatant command, to an officer designated by
 

the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for such purpose.'' for
 

''funds, upon request,'' and all that follows through the period,
 

could not be executed because the words did not appear subsequent
 

to the
 

amendment by Pub. L. 102-396, Sec. 9128(a). See below. Pub. L.
 

102-396, Sec. 9128(a), substituted ''funds to the commander of a
 

combatant command, upon the request of the commander, or to the
 

Director of the Joint Staff with respect to an area or areas not
 

within the area of responsibility of a commander of a combatant
 

command.'' for ''funds, upon request, to the
 

commanders of the combatant commands.''
 

Subsec. (b)(7). Pub. L. 102-396, Sec. 9128(b), and Pub. L. 102­

484, Sec. 934(b), both inserted before period at end ''(including
 

transportation, translation, and administrative expenses)''.
 

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 102-484, Sec. 934(c), amended subsec. (c)
 

generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (c) read as follows: ''The
 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in considering requests
 

for funds in the CINC Initiative Fund, should give priority
 

consideration to requests for funds to be used for activities
 

that would enhance the war fighting capability, readiness, and
 

sustainability of the forces assigned to the commander requesting
 

the funds (c) Priority. - The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
 

Staff, in considering requests for funds in the CINC Initiative
 

Fund or the provision of funds to the Director of the Joint Staff
 

under subsection (a), should give priority consideration to ­

''(1) requests for funds to be used for activities that would
 

enhance the war fighting capability, readiness, and
 

sustainability of the forces assigned to the commander requesting
 

the funds; and
 

''(2) the provision of funds to be used for activities with
 

respect to an area or areas not within the area of responsibility
 

of a commander of a combatant command that would reduce the
 

threat to, or otherwise increase, the national security of the
 

United States..(sic)''
 

Pub. L. 102-396, Sec. 9128(c), inserted before period at end
 

280 Appendix D-8 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

''(c) Priority. - The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in
 

considering requests for funds in the CINC Initiative Fund or the
 

provision of funds to the Director of the Joint Staff under
 

subsection (a), should give priority consideration to ­

''(1) requests for funds to be used for activities that
 

wouldenhance the war fighting capability, readiness, and
 

sustainability of the forces assigned to the commander requesting
 

the funds; and
 

''(2) the provision of funds to be used for activities with
 

respect to an area or areas not within the area of responsibility
 

of a commander of a combatant command that would reduce the
 

threat to, or otherwise increase, the national security of the
 

United States.''
 

Subsec. (e)(1)(C). Pub. L. 102-484, Sec. 934(d), amended subpar.
 

(C) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (C) read as follows:
 

''not more than $5,000,000 may be used to provide military
 

education and training (including transportation, translation,
 

and administrative expenses) to military and related civilian
 

personnel of foreign countries as authorized by subsection
 

(b)(7).''
 

Pub. L. 102-396, Sec. 9128(d), amended subpar. (C) generally.
 

Prior to amendment, subpar. (C) read as follows: ''not more than
 

$500,000 may be used to provide military education and training
 

to military and related civilian personnel of foreign countries
 

as authorized by subsection (b)(7).''
 

Appendix D-8 281 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-9: 10 USC SEC. 401, HUMANITARIAN AND CIVIC 

ASSISTANCE PROVIDED IN CONJUNCTION WITH MILITARY OPERATIONS 

10 USC Sec. 401 01/05/99
 

TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
 

Subtitle A - General Military Law
 

PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
 

CHAPTER 20 - HUMANITARIAN AND OTHER ASSISTANCE
 

Sec. 401. Humanitarian and civic assistance provided in
 

conjunction with military operations
 

(a)(1) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense,
 

the Secretary of a military department may carry out humanitarian
 

and civic assistance activities in conjunction with authorized
 

military operations of the armed forces in a country if the
 

Secretary concerned determines that the activities will promote –
 

(A) the security interests of both the United States and the
 

country in which the activities are to be carried out; and
 

(B) the specific operational readiness skills of the members of
 

the armed forces who participate in the activities.
 

(2) Humanitarian and civic assistance activities carried out
 

under this section shall complement, and may not duplicate, any
 

other form of social or economic assistance which may be provided
 

to the country concerned by any other department or agency of the
 

United States. Such activities shall serve the basic economic and
 

social needs of the people of the country concerned.
 

(3) Humanitarian and civic assistance may not be provided under
 

this section (directly or indirectly) to any individual, group,
 

or organization engaged in military or paramilitary activity.
 

(4) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that no member of the
 

armed forces, while providing assistance under this section that
 

is described in subsection (e)(5) ­

(A) engages in the physical detection, lifting, or destroying of
 

landmines (unless the member does so for the concurrent purpose
 

of supporting a United States military operation); or
 

(B) provides such assistance as part of a military operation that
 

does not involve the armed forces.
 

(b)(1) Humanitarian and civic assistance may not be provided
 

under this section to any foreign country unless the Secretary of
 

State specifically approves the provision of such assistance.
 

(2) Any authority provided under any other provision of law to
 

provide assistance that is described in subsection (e)(5) to a
 

foreign country shall be carried out in accordance with, and
 

subject to, the limitations prescribed in this section. Any such
 

provision may be construed as superseding a provision of this
 

section only if, and to the extent that, such provision
 

282 Appendix D-9 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

specifically refers to this section and specifically identifies
 

the provision of this section that is to be considered superseded
 

or otherwise inapplicable under such provision.
 

(c)(1) Expenses incurred as a direct result of providing
 

humanitarian and civic assistance under this section to a foreign
 

country shall be paid for out of funds specifically appropriated
 

for such purpose.
 

(2) Expenses covered by paragraph (1) include the following
 

expenses incurred in providing assistance described in subsection
 

(e)(5):
 

(A) Travel, transportation, and subsistence expenses of
 

Department of Defense personnel providing such assistance.
 

(B) The cost of any equipment, services, or supplies acquired for
 

the purpose of carrying out or supporting the activities
 

described in subsection (e)(5), including any nonlethal,
 

individual, or small-team landmine clearing equipment or supplies
 

that are to be transferred or otherwise furnished to a foreign
 

country in furtherance of the provision of assistance under this
 

section.
 

(3) The cost of equipment, services, and supplies provided in any
 

fiscal year under paragraph (2)(B) may not exceed $5,000,000.
 

(4) Nothing in this section may be interpreted to preclude the
 

incurring of minimal expenditures by the Department of Defense
 

for purposes of humanitarian and civic assistance out of funds
 

other than funds appropriated pursuant to paragraph (1), except
 

that funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for
 

operation and maintenance (other than funds appropriated pursuant
 

to such paragraph) may be obligated for humanitarian and civic
 

assistance under this section only for incidental costs of
 

carrying out such
 

assistance.
 

(d) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on
 

Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
 

Senate and the Committee on National Security and the Committee
 

on International Relations of the House of Representatives a
 

report, not later than March 1 of each year, on activities
 

carried out under this section during the preceding fiscal year.
 

The Secretary shall include in each such report ­

(1) a list of the countries in which humanitarian and civic
 

assistance activities were carried out during the preceding
 

fiscal year;
 

(2) the type and description of such activities carried out in
 

each country during the preceding fiscal year; and
 

(3) the amount expended in carrying out each such activity in
 

each such country during the preceding fiscal year.
 

Appendix D-9 283 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(e) In this section, the term ''humanitarian and civic
 

assistance'' means any of the following:
 

(1) Medical, dental, and veterinary care provided in rural areas
 

of a country.
 

(2) Construction of rudimentary surface transportation systems.
 

(3) Well drilling and construction of basic sanitation
 

facilities.
 

(4) Rudimentary construction and repair of public facilities.
 

(5) Detection and clearance of landmines, including activities
 

relating to the furnishing of education, training, and technical
 

assistance with respect to the detection and clearance of
 

landmines.
 

-SOURCE­

(Added Pub. L. 99-661, div. A, title III, Sec. 333(a)(1), Nov.
 

14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3857; amended Pub. L. 100-180, div. A, title
 

III, Sec. 332(b)(1)-(5), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1080; Pub. L.
 

100-456, div. A, title XII, Sec. 1233(g)(1), Sept. 29, 1988, 102
 

Stat. 2058; Pub. L. 103-160, div. A, title XI, Sec. 1182(a)(1),
 

title XV, Sec. 1504(b), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1771, 1839; Pub.
 

L. 104-106, div. A, title XIII, Sec. 1313(a), (b), title XV, Sec.
 

1502(a)(8), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 474, 475, 503; Pub. L. 104­

201, div. A, title X, Sec. 1074(a)(2), title XIII, Sec. 1304,
 

Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2658, 2704.)
 

-MISC1­

AMENDMENTS
 

1996 - Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 104-201, Sec. 1074(a)(2)(A),
 

substituted ''armed forces'' for ''Armed Forces'' in two places.
 

Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1313(b), added par. (4). Subsec. (b). Pub.
 

L. 104-201, Sec. 1304(b), designated existing provisions as par.
 

(1) and added par. (2).
 

Subsec. (c)(2) to (4). Pub. L. 104-201, Sec. 1304(a), added pars.
 

(2) and (3) and redesignated former par. (2) as (4).
 

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1502(a)(8), substituted
 

''Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign
 

Relations of the Senate and the Committee on National Security
 

and the Committee on International Relations'' for ''Committees
 

on Armed Services and Foreign Relations of the Senate and to the
 

Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Affairs''.
 

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 104-201, Sec. 1074(a)(2)(B), inserted ''any
 

of the following'' after ''means'' in introductory provisions.
 

Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1313(a)(1), substituted ''means:'' for
 

''means - '' in introductory provisions.
 

Subsec. (e)(1). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1313(a)(2), (3),
 

substituted ''Medical'' for ''medical'' and ''country.'' for
 

''country;''.
 

Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1313(a)(2), (3),
 

substituted ''Construction'' for ''construction'' and
 

''systems.'' for ''systems;''.
 

284 Appendix D-9 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1313(a)(2), (4),
 

substituted ''Well'' for ''well'' and ''facilities.'' for
 

''facilities; and''.
 

Subsec. (e)(4). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1313(a)(2), substituted
 

''Rudimentary'' for ''rudimentary''.
 

Subsec. (e)(5). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1313(a)(5), added par. (5).
 

1993 - Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 103-160, Sec. 1504(b), inserted
 

before period '', except that funds appropriated to the
 

Department of Defense for operation and maintenance (other than
 

funds appropriated pursuant to such paragraph) may be obligated
 

for humanitarian and civic assistance under this section only for
 

incidental costs of carrying out such assistance''.
 

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 103-160, Sec. 1182(a)(1), struck out subsec.
 

(f) which read as follows: ''Not more than $16,400,000 may be
 

obligated or expended for the purposes of this section during
 

fiscal years 1987 through 1991.''
 

1988 - Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 100-456 substituted ''paragraph
 

(1)'' for ''subsection (a)''.
 

1987 - Pub. L. 100-180, Sec. 332(b)(1)(A), substituted
 

''Humanitarian and civic assistance provided in conjunction with
 

military operations'' for ''Armed forces participation in
 

humanitarian and civic assistance activities'' in section
 

catchline.
 

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 100-180, Sec. 332(b)(1)(B), (C), (5),
 

redesignated former subsec. (a) as par. (1) and former cls. (1)
 

and (2) as cls. (A) and (B), respectively, redesignated former
 

subsecs. (b) and (c) as pars. (2) and (3), respectively, and
 

substituted ''section'' for ''chapter'' wherever appearing.
 

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 100-180, Sec. 332(b)(2), (5), struck out
 

section catchline of former section 402 ''Approval of Secretary
 

of State'', designated text of former section 402 as subsec. (b)
 

of this section, and substituted ''section'' for ''chapter''.
 

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 100-180, Sec. 332(b)(3), (5), struck out
 

section catchline of former section 403 ''Payment of expenses'',
 

redesignated former section 403(a) and (b) as subsec. (c)(1) and
 

(2), respectively, of this section, and substituted ''section''
 

for ''chapter'' wherever appearing.
 

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 100-180, Sec. 332(b)(4), (5), struck out
 

section catchline of former section 404 ''Annual report to
 

Congress'', designated text of former section 404 as subsec. (d)
 

of this section, and substituted ''section'' for ''chapter''.
 

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 100-180, Sec. 332(b)(4), (5), struck out
 

section catchline of former section 405 ''Definition of
 

humanitarian and civic assistance'', designated text of former
 

section 405 as subsec. (e) of this section, and substituted
 

''section'' for ''chapter''.
 

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 100-180, Sec. 332(b)(4), (5), struck out
 

section catchline of former section 406 ''Expenditure
 

limitation'', designated text of former section 406 as subsec.
 

(f) of this section, and substituted ''section'' for ''chapter''.
 

-CHANGECHANGE OF NAME
 

Committee on National Security of House of Representatives
 

changed to Committee on Armed Services of House of
 

Appendix D-9 285 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Representatives by House Resolution No. 5, One Hundred Sixth
 

Congress, Jan. 6, 1999.
 

-MISC4­

HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR CLEARING LANDMINES
 

Pub. L. 103-337, div. A, title XIV, Sec. 1413, Oct. 5, 1994, 108
 

Stat. 2913, required Secretary of Defense to carry out program
 

for humanitarian purposes to provide assistance to other nations
 

in detection and clearance of landmines, specified that such
 

assistance was to be provided through instruction, education,
 

training, and advising of personnel of those nations in
 

procedures determined effective for detecting and clearing
 

landmines, specified forms of assistance, required Secretary to
 

ensure that no member of Armed Forces engaged in physical
 

detection, lifting, or destroying of landmines (unless done for
 

concurrent purpose of supporting United States military
 

operations) or gave such assistance as part of military operation
 

not involving Armed Forces, made funds available, specified uses
 

of funds, and required Secretary to provide notice to Congress of
 

activities carried out
 

under the program, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 104-106, div. A,
 

title XIII, Sec. 1313(c), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 475.
 

HUMANITARIAN AND CIVIC ASSISTANCE
 

Section 1504 of Pub. L. 103-160 provided that:
 

''(a) Regulations. - The regulations required to be prescribed
 

under section 401 of title 10, United States Code, shall be
 

prescribed not later than March 1, 1994. In prescribing such
 

regulations, the Secretary of Defense shall consult with the
 

Secretary of State.
 

''(b) Limitation on Use of Funds. - (Amended section 401(c)(2) of
 

this title.)
 

''(c) Notifications Regarding Humanitarian Relief. – Any
 

notification provided to the appropriate congressional committees
 

with respect to assistance activities under section 2551 of title
 

10, United States Code, shall include a detailed description of
 

any items for which transportation is provided that are excess
 

nonlethal supplies of the Department of Defense, including the
 

quantity, acquisition value, and value at the time of the
 

transportation of such items.
 

''(d) Report on Humanitarian Assistance Activities. - (1) The
 

Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate
 

congressional committees a report on the activities planned to be
 

carried out by the Department of Defense during fiscal year 1995
 

under sections 401, 402, 2547, and 2551 of title 10, United
 

States Code. The report shall include information, developed
 

after consultation with the Secretary of State, on the
 

distribution of excess nonlethal supplies transferred to the
 

Secretary of State during fiscal year
 

1993 pursuant to section 2547 of that title.
 

''(2) The report shall be submitted at the same time that the
 

President submits the budget for fiscal year 1995 to Congress
 

pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code.
 

''(e) Authorization of Appropriations. - The funds authorized to
 

be appropriated by section 301(18) (107 Stat. 1616) shall be
 

286 Appendix D-9 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

available to carry out humanitarian and civic assistance
 

activities under sections 401, 402, and 2551 of title 10, United
 

States Code.
 

''(f) Appropriate Congressional Committees. - In this section,
 

the term 'appropriate congressional committees' means ­

''(1) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed
 

Services (now Committee on National Security), and the Committee
 

on Foreign Affairs (now Committee on International Relations) of
 

the House of Representatives; and
 

''(2) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed
 

Services, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.''
 

HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE; EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION OF INDIVIDUALS
 

Pub. L. 102-396, title II, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1884,
 

provided: ''That where required and notwithstanding any other
 

provision of law, funds made available under this heading
 

(Humanitarian Assistance) for fiscal year 1993 or thereafter,
 

shall be available for emergency transportation of United States
 

or foreign nationals or the emergency transportation of
 

humanitarian
 

relief personnel in conjunction with humanitarian relief
 

operations.''
 

APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR HUMANITARIAN AND CIVIC ASSISTANCE;
 

ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS ON OBLIGATIONS; USE OF CIVIC ACTION
 

TEAMS IN TRUST TERRITORIES OF PACIFIC ISLANDS AND FREELY
 

ASSOCIATED
 

STATES OF MICRONESIA
 

Pub. L. 105-262, title VIII, Sec. 8009, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat.
 

2298, provided that: ''Within the funds appropriated for the
 

operation and maintenance of the Armed Forces, funds are hereby
 

appropriated pursuant to section 401 of title 10, United States
 

Code, for humanitarian and civic assistance costs under chapter
 

20 of title 10, United States Code. Such funds may also be
 

obligated for humanitarian and civic assistance costs incidental
 

to authorized operations and pursuant to authority granted in
 

section 401 of chapter 20 of title 10, United States Code, and
 

these obligations shall be reported to Congress on September 30
 

of each year: Provided, That funds available for operation and
 

maintenance shall be available for providing humanitarian and
 

similar assistance by using Civic Action Teams in the Trust
 

Territories of the Pacific Islands and freely associated states
 

of Micronesia, pursuant to the Compact of Free Association as
 

authorized by Public Law 99-239 (48 U.S.C. 1901 note): Provided
 

further, That upon a
 

determination by the Secretary of the Army that such action is
 

beneficial for graduate medical education programs conducted at
 

Army medical facilities located in Hawaii, the Secretary of the
 

Army may authorize the provision of medical services at such
 

facilities and transportation to such facilities, on a
 

nonreimbursable basis, for civilian patients from American Samoa,
 

the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Marshall
 

Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, and Guam.''
 

(For termination of Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, see
 

Appendix D-9 287 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

note set out preceding section 1681 of Title 48, Territories and
 

Insular Possessions.)
 

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior
 

appropriation acts:
 

Pub. L. 105-56, title VIII, Sec. 8009, Oct. 8, 1997, 111 Stat.
 

1222.
 

Pub. L. 104-208, div. A, title I, Sec. 101(b) (title VIII, Sec.
 

8010), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009-71, 3009-90.
 

Pub. L. 104-61, title VIII, Sec. 8011, Dec. 1, 1995, 109 Stat.
 

653.
 

Pub. L. 103-335, title VIII, Sec. 8011, Sept. 30, 1994, 108 Stat.
 

2619.
 

Pub. L. 103-139, title VIII, Sec. 8012, Nov. 11, 1993, 107 Stat.
 

1439.
 

Pub. L. 102-396, title IX, Sec. 9021, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat.
 

1904.
 

Pub. L. 102-172, title VIII, Sec. 8021, Nov. 26, 1991, 105 Stat.
 

1175.
 

Pub. L. 101-511, title VIII, Sec. 8021, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat.
 

1879.
 

Pub. L. 101-165, title IX, Sec. 9031, Nov. 21, 1989, 103 Stat.
 

1135.
 

Pub. L. 100-463, title VIII, Sec. 8051, Oct. 1, 1988, 102 Stat.
 

2270-25.
 

Pub. L. 100-202, Sec. 101(b) (title VIII, Sec. 8063), Dec. 22,
 

1987, 101 Stat. 1329-43, 1329-73.
 

288 Appendix D-9 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-10: 10 USC SEC. 402, TRANSPORTATION OF
 

HUMANITARIAN RELIEF SUPPLIES TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES
 

10 USC Sec. 402 01/05/99
 

TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
 

Subtitle A - General Military Law PART I - ORGANIZATION AND
 

GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
 

CHAPTER 20 - HUMANITARIAN AND OTHER ASSISTANCE
 

Sec. 402. Transportation of humanitarian relief supplies to
 

foreign
 

countries
 

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and subject to
 

subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense may transport to any
 

country, without charge, supplies which have been furnished by a
 

nongovernmental source and which are intended for humanitarian
 

assistance. Such supplies may be transported only on a space
 

available basis.
 

(b)(1) The Secretary may not transport supplies under
 

subsection (a) unless the Secretary determines that ­

(A) the transportation of such supplies is consistent with
 

the foreign policy of the United States;
 

(B) the supplies to be transported are suitable for
 

humanitarian purposes and are in usable condition;
 

(C) there is a legitimate humanitarian need for such
 

supplies by the people for whom they are intended;
 

(D) the supplies will in fact be used for humanitarian
 

purposes; and
 

(E) adequate arrangements have been made for the
 

distribution of such supplies in the destination country.
 

(2) The President shall establish procedures for making the
 

determinations required under paragraph (1). Such procedures
 

shall include inspection of supplies before acceptance for
 

transport.
 

(3) It shall be the responsibility of the donor to ensure that
 

supplies to be transported under this section are suitable for
 

transport.
 

(c)(1) Supplies transported under this section may be distributed
 

by an agency of the United States Government, a foreign
 

government, an international organization, or a private nonprofit
 

relief organization.
 

(2) Supplies transported under this section may not be
 

distributed, directly or indirectly, to any individual, group, or
 

organization engaged in a military or paramilitary activity.
 

Appendix D-10 289 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(d) Not later than July 31 each year, the Secretary of State
 

shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee
 

on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on National
 

Security and the Committee on International Relations of the
 

House of Representatives a report identifying the origin,
 

contents, destination, and disposition of all supplies
 

transported under this section during the 12-month period ending
 

on the preceding June 30.
 

-SOURCE­

(Added Pub. L. 100-180, div. A, title III, Sec. 332(a), Dec. 4,
 

1987, 101 Stat. 1079; amended Pub. L. 101-510, div. A, title
 

XIII, Sec. 1311(2), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1669; Pub. L. 104­

106, div. A, title XV, Sec. 1502(a)(8), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat.
 

503.)
 

-MISC1­

PRIOR PROVISIONS
 

A prior section 402 was renumbered section 401(b) of this title.
 

AMENDMENTS
 

1996 - Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 104-106 substituted ''Committee on
 

Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
 

Senate and the Committee on National Security and the Committee
 

on International Relations'' for ''Committees on Armed Services
 

and Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committees on Armed
 

Services and Foreign Affairs''.
 

1990 - Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 101-510 substituted ''Not later than
 

July 31 each year'' for ''At the end of each six-month period''
 

and ''the 12-month period ending on the preceding June 30'' for
 

''such six-month period''.
 

-CHANGECHANGE OF NAME
 

Committee on National Security of House of Representatives
 

changed to Committee on Armed Services of House of
 

Representatives by House Resolution No. 5, One Hundred Sixth
 

Congress, Jan. 6, 1999.
 

-TRANSDELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS
 

Functions of President under subsec. (b)(2) delegated to
 

Secretary of State by section 1-201(a)(24) of Ex. Ord. No. 12163,
 

Sept. 29, 1979, 44 F.R. 56673, as amended, set out as a note
 

under section 2381 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and
 

Intercourse.
 

-MISC5­

FIRST REPORT DEADLINE
 

Section 332(d) of Pub. L. 100-180 directed that first report
 

under section 402(d) of this title be submitted not more than six
 

months after the date on which the most recent report was
 

submitted under section 1540(e) of the Department of Defense
 

Authorization Act, 1985 (Pub. L. 98-525; 98 Stat. 2638).
 

-SECREF-


290 Appendix D-10 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-11: 10 USC SEC. 404, FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE
 

10 USC Sec. 404 01/05/99
 

TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
 

Subtitle A - General Military Law
 

PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
 

CHAPTER 20 - HUMANITARIAN AND OTHER ASSISTANCE
 

Sec. 404. Foreign disaster assistance
 

-STATUTE­

(a) In General. - The President may direct the Secretary of
 

Defense to provide disaster assistance outside the United States
 

to
 

respond to manmade or natural disasters when necessary to prevent
 

loss of lives.
 

(b) Forms of Assistance. - Assistance provided under this section
 

may include transportation, supplies, services, and equipment.
 

(c) Notification Required. - Not later than 48 hours after the
 

commencement of disaster assistance activities to provide
 

assistance under this section, the President shall transmit to
 

Congress a report containing notification of the assistance
 

provided, and proposed to be provided, under this section and a
 

description of so much of the following as is then available:
 

(1) The manmade or natural disaster for which disaster
 

assistance is necessary.
 

(2) The threat to human lives presented by the disaster.
 

(3) The United States military personnel and material
 

resources
 

that are involved or expected to be involved.
 

(4) The disaster assistance that is being provided or is
 

expected to be provided by other nations or public or private
 

relief organizations.
 

(5) The anticipated duration of the disaster assistance
 

activities.
 

(d) Organizing Policies and Programs. - Amounts appropriated to
 

the Department of Defense for any fiscal year for Overseas
 

Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid (OHDACA) programs of the
 

Department shall be available for organizing general policies and
 

programs for disaster relief programs for disasters occurring
 

outside the United States.
 

-SOURCE­

(Added Pub. L. 103-337, div. A, title XIV, Sec. 1412(a), Oct. 5,
 

1994, 108 Stat. 2912.)
 

-MISC1­

Appendix D-11 291 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-12: 10 USC SEC. 2547, EXCESS NONLETHAL SUPPLIES: 

HUMANITARIAN RELIEF 

10 USC Sec. 2547 01/05/99
 

TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
 

Subtitle A - General Military Law
 

PART IV - SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT
 

CHAPTER 152 - ISSUE OF SUPPLIES, SERVICES, AND FACILITIES
 

Sec. 2547. Excess nonlethal supplies: humanitarian relief
 

(a) The Secretary of Defense may make available for humanitarian
 

relief purposes any nonlethal excess supplies of the Department
 

of
 

Defense.
 

(b) Excess supplies made available for humanitarian relief
 

purposes under this section shall be transferred to the Secretary
 

of State, who shall be responsible for the distribution of such
 

supplies.
 

(c) This section does not constitute authority to conduct any
 

activity which, if carried out as an intelligence activity by the
 

Department of Defense, would require a notice to the intelligence
 

committees under title V of the National Security Act of 1947 (50
 

U.S.C. 413 et seq.).
 

(d) In this section:
 

(1) The term ''nonlethal excess supplies'' means property, other
 

than real property, of the Department of Defense ­

(A) that is excess property, as defined in regulations of
 

the
 

Department of Defense; and
 

(B) that is not a weapon, ammunition, or other equipment or
 

material that is designed to inflict serious bodily harm or
 

death.
 

(2) The term ''intelligence committees'' means the Select
 

Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent Select
 

Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.
 

-SOURCE­

(Added Pub. L. 99-145, title XIV, Sec. 1454(a), Nov. 8, 1985, 99
 

Stat. 761; amended Pub. L. 100-26, Sec. 7(k)(2), Apr. 21, 1987,
 

Stat. 284; Pub. L. 101-510, div. A, title XIII, Sec. 1322(a)(10),
 

Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1671; Pub. L. 102-88, title VI, Sec.
 

602(c)(3), Aug. 14, 1991, 105 Stat. 444.)
 

292 Appendix D-12 

101 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

-REFTEXTREFERENCES IN TEXT
 

The National Security Act of 1947, referred to in subsec. (c), is
 

act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, 61 Stat. 495, as amended. Title V of
 

the Act is classified generally to subchapter III (Sec. 413 et
 

seq.) of chapter 15 of Title 50, War and National Defense. For
 

complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title
 

note set out under section 401 of Title 50 and Tables.
 

-MISC2­

AMENDMENTS
 

1991 - Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 102-88 struck out par. (1) which read
 

as follows: ''a finding under section 662 of the Foreign
 

Assistance
 

Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2422); or'', struck out par. (2)
 

designation, and substituted ''title V of the National Security
 

Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 413 et seq.)'' for ''section 501(a)(1) of
 

the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 413)''.
 

1990 - Subsecs. (d), (e). Pub. L. 101-510 redesignated subsec.
 

(e) as (d) and struck out former subsec. (d) which read as
 

follows:
 

''(1) The Secretary of State shall submit an annual report on the
 

disposition of all excess supplies transferred by the Secretary
 

of
 

Defense to the Secretary of State under this section during the
 

preceding year.
 

''(2) Such reports shall be submitted to the Committees on Armed
 

Services and on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
 

Committees
 

on Armed Services and on Foreign Affairs of the House of
 

Representatives.
 

''(3) Such reports shall be submitted not later than June 1 of
 

each year.''
 

1987 - Subsec. (e)(1), (2). Pub. L. 100-26 inserted ''The term''
 

after each par. designation and struck out uppercase letter of
 

first word after first quotation marks in each par. and
 

substituted
 

lowercase letter.
 

-SECREFSECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS
 

This section is referred to in sections 2551, 2552 of this title.
 

Appendix D-12 293 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-13: 10 USC SEC. 2551, HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE
 

10 USC Sec. 2551 01/05/99
 

TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
 

Subtitle A - General Military Law
 

PART IV - SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT
 

CHAPTER 152 - ISSUE OF SUPPLIES, SERVICES, AND FACILITIES
 

Sec. 2551. Humanitarian assistance
 

(a) Authorized Assistance. - To the extent provided in defense
 

authorization Acts, funds authorized to be appropriated to the
 

Department of Defense for a fiscal year for humanitarian
 

assistance shall be used for the purpose of providing
 

transportation of humanitarian relief and for other humanitarian
 

purposes worldwide.
 

(b) Availability of Funds. - To the extent provided in
 

appropriation Acts, funds appropriated for humanitarian
 

assistance for the purposes of this section shall remain
 

available until expended.
 

(c) Status Reports. - (1) The Secretary of Defense shall submit
 

to the congressional committees specified in subsection (f) an
 

annual report on the provision of humanitarian assistance
 

pursuant to this section for the prior fiscal year. The report
 

shall be submitted each year at the time of the budget submission
 

by the President for the next fiscal year.
 

(2) Each report required by paragraph (1) shall cover all
 

provisions of law that authorize appropriations for humanitarian
 

assistance to be available from the Department of Defense for the
 

purposes of this section.
 

(3) Each report under this subsection shall set forth the
 

following information regarding activities during the previous
 

fiscal year:
 

(A) The total amount of funds obligated for humanitarian
 

relief
 

under this section.
 

(B) The number of scheduled and completed transportation
 

missions for purposes of providing humanitarian assistance under
 

this section.
 

(C) A description of any transfer of excess nonlethal
 

supplies
 

of the Department of Defense made available for humanitarian
 

relief purposes under section 2547 of this title. The description
 

shall include the date of the transfer, the entity to whom the
 

transfer is made, and the quantity of items transferred.
 

(d) Report Regarding Relief for Unauthorized Countries. - In any
 

294 Appendix D-13 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

case in which the Secretary of Defense provides for the
 

transportation of humanitarian relief to a country to which the
 

transportation of humanitarian relief has not been specifically
 

authorized by law, the Secretary shall notify the congressional
 

committees specified in subsection (f) and the Committees on
 

Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives of the
 

Secretary's intention to provide such transportation. The
 

notification shall be submitted not less than 15 days before the
 

commencement of such transportation.
 

(e) Definition. - In this section, the term ''defense
 

authorization Act'' means an Act that authorizes appropriations
 

for one or more fiscal years for military activities of the
 

Department of Defense, including authorizations of appropriations
 

for the activities described in paragraph (7) of section 114(a)
 

of this title.
 

(f) Congressional Committees. - The congressional committees
 

referred to in subsections (c)(1) and (d) are the following:
 

(1) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign
 

Relations of the Senate.
 

(2) The Committee on National Security and the Committee on
 

International Relations of the House of Representatives.
 

-SOURCE­

(Added Pub. L. 102-484, div. A, title III, Sec. 304(c)(1), Oct.
 

23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2361; amended Pub. L. 104-106, div. A, title
 

XIII, Sec. 1312, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 474.)
 

-MISC1­

AMENDMENTS
 

1996 - Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1312(1), (2),
 

redesignated subsec. (d) as (b) and struck out former subsec. (b)
 

which read as follows: ''Authority To Transfer Funds. - To the
 

extent provided in defense authorization Acts for a fiscal year,
 

the Secretary of Defense may transfer to the Secretary of State
 

funds appropriated for the purposes of this section to provide
 

for
 

- ''(1) the payment of administrative costs incurred in providing
 

the transportation described in subsection (a); and
 

''(2) the purchase or other acquisition of transportation
 

assets for the distribution of humanitarian relief supplies in
 

the country of destination.''
 

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1312(1), (3), added subsec.
 

(c) and struck out former subsec. (c) which read as follows:
 

''(c) Transportation of Humanitarian Relief. - (1) Transportation
 

of humanitarian relief provided with funds appropriated for the
 

purposes of this section shall be provided under the direction of
 

the Secretary of State.
 

''(2) Such transportation shall be provided by the most
 

economical commercial or military means available, unless the
 

Secretary of State determines that it is in the national interest
 

of the United States to provide such transportation other than by
 

Appendix D-13 295 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

the most economical means available. The means used to provide
 

such transportation may include the use of aircraft and personnel
 

of the reserve components of the Armed Forces. ''(3) Nothing in
 

this subsection shall be construed as waiving
 

the requirements of section 2631 of this title and sections
 

901(b)
 

and 901b of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 U.S.C. App. 1241(b)
 

and 1241f).''
 

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1312(4), redesignated subsec.
 

(f) as (d) and substituted ''the congressional committees
 

specified
 

in subsection (f) and the Committees on Appropriations of the
 

Senate and House of Representatives of the'' for ''the Committees
 

on Appropriations and on Armed Services of the Senate and House
 

of
 

Representatives, the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
 

Senate,
 

and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
 

Representatives of the''. Former subsec. (d) redesignated (b).
 

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1312(3), (5), redesignated
 

subsec. (g) as (e) and struck out former subsec. (e) which
 

required
 

status reports and specified time for submission, coverage, and
 

contents.
 

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1312(6), added subsec. (f).
 

Former subsec. (f) redesignated (d).
 

Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 104-106, Sec. 1312(5), redesignated subsec.
 

(g) as (e).
 

-CHANGECHANGE OF NAME
 

Committee on National Security of House of Representatives
 

changed to Committee on Armed Services of House of
 

Representatives by House Resolution No. 5, One Hundred Sixth
 

Congress, Jan. 6, 1999.
 

-MISC4­

NOTIFICATIONS REGARDING HUMANITARIAN RELIEF
 

Notification provided to appropriate congressional committees
 

with respect to assistance under this section to include detailed
 

description of items for which transportation is provided that
 

are excess nonlethal supplies of Department of Defense, including
 

quantity, acquisition value, and value at time of transportation
 

of such items, see section 1504(c) of Pub. L. 103-160, set out in
 

a Humanitarian and Civic Assistance note under section 401 of
 

this title.
 

LAWS COVERED BY INITIAL REPORTS
 

Section 304(d) of Pub. L. 102-484 provided that: ''For purposes
 

of (former) subsection (e) of section 2551 of title 10, United
 

States Code, as added by subsection (c), section 304 of the
 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993
 

(Public Law 102-190; 105 Stat. 1333), and the humanitarian relief
 

laws referred to in subsection (f)(4) of section 304 of that Act
 

(as in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this
 

296 Appendix D-13 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-14: 22 USC SEC. 2318, SPECIAL AUTHORITY
 

22 U.S.C. Sec. 2318. Special authority
 

(a) Unforeseen emergency; national interest; determinations and
 

reports to Congress; limitation of defense articles, defense
 

services, and military education and training furnished
 

(1) If the President determines and reports to the Congress
 

in accordance with section 2411 of this title that ­

(A) an unforeseen emergency exists which requires
 

immediate
 

military assistance to a foreign country or
 

international
 

organization; and
 

(B) the emergency requirement cannot be met under the
 

authority of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C.
 

2751 et seq.) or any other law except this section; he
 

may direct, for the purposes of subchapter II of this
 

chapter, the drawdown of defense articles from the
 

stocks of the Department of Defense, defense services
 

of the Department of Defense, and military education
 

and training, of an aggregate value of not to exceed
 

$100,000,000 in any fiscal year.
 

(2)
 

(A) If the President determines and reports to the
 

Congress in accordance with section 2411 of this title
 

that it is in the national interest of the United
 

States to draw down articles and services from the
 

inventory and resources of any agency of the United
 

States Government and military education and training
 

from the Department of Defense, the President may
 

direct the drawdown of such articles, services, and
 

military education and training ­

(i) for the purposes and under the authorities of ­

(I) part VIII of subchapter I of this chapter
 

(relating to
 

international narcotics control assistance);
 

(II) part IX of subchapter I of this chapter
 

(relating to
 

international disaster assistance); or
 

(III) the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of
 

1962 (22 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.); or
 

(ii) for the purpose of providing such articles,
 

services, and military education and training to
 

Appendix D-14 297 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos as the President
 

determines are necessary ­

(I) to support cooperative efforts to
 

locate and repatriate members of the United
 

States Armed Forces and civilians employed
 

directly or indirectly by the United States
 

Government who remain unaccounted for from
 

the Vietnam War; and
 

(II) to ensure the safety of United States
 

Government personnel engaged in such
 

cooperative efforts and to support
 

Department of Defense-sponsored
 

humanitarian projects associated with such
 

efforts.
 

(B) An aggregate value of not to exceed $150,000,000
 

in any fiscal year of such articles, services, and
 

military education and training may be provided
 

pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this paragraph ­

(i) not more than $75,000,000 of which may be
 

provided from the drawdown from the inventory and
 

resources of the Department of Defense;
 

(ii) not more than $75,000,000 of which may be
 

provided pursuant to clause (i)(I) of such
 

subparagraph; and
 

(iii) not more than $15,000,000 of which may be
 

provided to Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos pursuant
 

to clause (ii) of such subparagraph.
 

(b) Notification and information to Congress of assistance
 

furnished
 

(1) The authority contained in this section shall be
 

effective for any such emergency only upon prior
 

notification to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the
 

House of Representatives, the Committee on Foreign Relations
 

of the Senate, and the Committee on Appropriations of each
 

House of Congress. In the case of drawdowns authorized by
 

subclauses (I) and (III) of subsection (a)(2)(A)(i) of this
 

section, notifications shall be provided to those committees
 

at least 15 days in advance of the drawdowns in accordance
 

with the procedures applicable to reprogramming
 

notifications under section 2394-1 of this title.
 

(2) The President shall keep the Congress fully and
 

currently informed of all defense articles, defense
 

services, and military education and training provided under
 

this section, including providing the Congress with a report
 

detailing all defense articles, defense services, and
 

military education and training delivered to the recipient
 

298 Appendix D-14 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

country or international organization upon delivery of such
 

articles or upon completion of such services or education
 

and training. Such report shall also include whether any
 

savings were realized by utilizing commercial transport
 

services rather than acquiring those services from United
 

States Government transport assets.
 

(c) Commercial transportation and related services
 

For the purposes of any provision of law that authorizes the
 

drawdown of defense or other articles or commodities, or defense
 

or other services from an agency of the United States Government,
 

such drawdown may include the supply of commercial transportation
 

and related services that are acquired by contract for the
 

purposes of the drawdown in question if the cost to acquire such
 

commercial transportation and related services is less than the
 

cost to the United States Government of providing such services
 

from existing agency assets.
 

(d) Authorization of appropriations for reimbursement of
 

applicable funds There are authorized to be appropriated to the
 

President such sums as may be necessary to reimburse the
 

applicable appropriation, fund, or account for defense articles,
 

defense services, and military education and training provided
 

under this section.
 

Appendix D-14 299 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-15: JOINT TRAVEL REGULATION EXTRACT
 

Joint Travel Regulation
 

CHAPTER 6 - TRAVEL UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
 

PART A: INVITATION TO TRAVEL
 

(NOTE: See par. C6004 for information concerning travel by
 

contractor and contractor employees.)
 

C6000 WHEN AND TO WHOM APPLICABLE
 

“Invitational travel may be authorized by use of an ITO when:
 

1. it is in the Service’s interest to invite a college or
 

university official or a representative of industry to
 

observe the work performed or the operations of an
 

activity;
 

2. an individual is requested to lecture, instruct, or give
 

a demonstration at an activity in connection with a DoD
 

operation or program;
 

3. an individual, singly or as part of a group, confers on
 

an official DoD matter with DoD officials and thereby
 

performs a direct service to the DoD, such as providing
 

advice or guidance; (ITOs are not authorized for
 

individuals merely to attend a meeting or conference,
 

even if hosted by a DoD component on a matter related to
 

the component's official business (see 55 Comp. Gen. 750
 

(1976));
 

4. an individual’s attendance at an incentive award ceremony
 

is related to an award presentation (32 Comp. Gen. 134
 

(1952)); (Travel and transportation to an award
 

presentation for a dependent or relative of an award
 

recipient is prohibited except as authorized under par.
 

C6002-E.);
 

5. an individual is an attendant for a handicapped employee
 

or Uniformed Service member who is to be given an OPM
 

award, a major department or agency award, or a non-


Federally sponsored honor award and who would be unable
 

to attend the award ceremony unattended (55 Comp. Gen.
 

800 (1976));
 

6. an individual’s attendance is for the purpose of serving
 

as a sponsor or in a similar official ceremony that is
 

related directly to DoD interests;
 

7. an individual is authorized pre-employment interview
 

travel under par. C6200;
 

8. individuals are serving without compensation on Boards of
 

Visitors as provided for in Departmental governing
 

regulations consistent with statutory authority;
 

9. a witness is called to testify in administrative
 

proceedings directed against a Government civilian
 

employee or Uniformed Service member in adverse action
 

300 Appendix D-15 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

type cases. The testimony can be on the Government’s
 

behalf or on behalf of the civilian employee or the
 

Uniformed Service member. The presiding hearing officer
 

must determine that the testimony of the witness is
 

substantial, material, and necessary for a proper
 

disposition of the case and that an affidavit from the
 

desired witness cannot accomplish the same objective
 

adequately;
 

10.	 an individual is called to testify as a witness at a
 

pretrial investigation conducted under Article 32,
 

Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §832;
 

11.	 attendance as a complainant at an administrative
 

hearing when the complaint is related to the
 

complainant’s Federal employment, the hearing is provided
 

for by applicable Federal employment regulations, and it
 

would be unreasonable to require the complainant to
 

appear at personal expense (B-180469, February 28, 1974);
 

12.	 when an individual is an attendant for: (a) a disabled
 

employee on official travel (56 Comp. Gen. 661 (1977)),
 

or (b) an employee who interrupts TDY because of
 

incapacitated illness or injury (par. C6454); and the
 

employee is incapable of traveling alone;
 

13.	 a determination is made by the order-issuing official
 

that a dependent may travel with the sponsor at
 

Government expense to attend an unquestionably official
 

function in which the dependent is actually to
 

participate in an official capacity, or such travel is
 

deemed in the national interest because of a diplomatic
 

or public relations benefit to the U.S. Such
 

participation ordinarily is limited to spouses and is
 

representational in nature. As such, travel is allowed on
 

a mission noninterference basis only, and must be
 

supported with ITOs, that ordinarily authorize
 

reimbursement of only transportation costs. However, the
 

order-issuing official may authorize/approve
 

transportation, per diem and/or other actual expense
 

allowances if it is determined that the individual's
 

travel is essential to accomplishing the mission and
 

there is a benefit for DoD beyond fulfilling a
 

representational role. Code 2 civilians, 4-star
 

general/flag officers, and certain 3-star general/flag
 

officers serving as OCONUS or combined commanders (as
 

specified in DoD 4515.13-R, “Air Transportation
 

Eligibility”), may authorize/approve transportation, per
 

diem, and/or other expense allowances for their spouses
 

on a case-by-case basis using the criteria in SecDef
 

memorandum dated 10 June 1994 (Subject: DoD Policy on the
 

use of Government Aircraft and Air Travel). This
 

authority does not constitute blanket approval authority.
 

Order-issuing officials for all other travel under this
 

item are: (a) The Office of the Secretary of Defense
 

Executive Secretary for SAM and OSA support for requests
 

from OSD, the Defense Agencies, and outside the DoD; (b)
 

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or designee,
 

for requests from the Joint Staff; (c) The Commanders of
 

Appendix D-15	 301 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Unified Commands, or their designees, for requests from
 

members and employees within their commands. (When joint
 

or dual-hatted personnel are traveling on behalf of their
 

joint commands, approval must be obtained through their
 

joint command approval authority and not through their
 

individual Service channels. This authority may be
 

further delegated in writing, but may not be delegated
 

below the Major Command Chief of Staff or equivalent
 

level for travel requests from DoD senior officials.
 

NOTE: Major Commands are those ordinarily commanded by 4­

star flag officers.); (d) The Secretaries of the Military
 

Departments, or their designees, for requests from their
 

staffs; (e) The Service Chiefs, or their designees, for
 

requests from members and employees within their Services
 

(This authority may be further delegated in writing, but
 

may not be delegated below the Major Command Chief of
 

Staff or equivalent level for travel requests from DoD
 

senior officials.). An ITO issued under the authority of
 

this item, that authorizes Government-funded
 

transportation only (i.e., no per diem or actual expense
 

allowances) for the dependent, must include the following
 

statement: "This order authorizes the dependent to
 

accompany the sponsor to attend an official function. It
 

does not entitle the dependent to per diem or other
 

expense allowances. If the dependent does not want to
 

bear these expenses, this order is canceled";
 

14.	 a determination is made by the Secretarial Process
 

for personnel within that department, or by the Chairman
 

of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or designated representative
 

for personnel assigned to the Joint Staff and unified
 

commands that the spouse of a civilian employee or
 

uniformed member may travel at Government expense to
 

attend a Service-endorsed training course or briefing and
 

subsequent voluntary service incident to such training or
 

briefing (71 Comp. Gen. 6 (1991)); or
 

15.	 travel is by an individual who serves as an organ
 

donor for a Uniformed Services member, when the donation
 

is authorized under Service regulations.
 

C6001 RESTRICTIONS
 

Invitational travel shall not be authorized for:
 

1. nonappropriated fund officials or employees traveling on
 

nonappropriated fund business;
 

2. contractor employees (except as provided in par. C6004);
 

2. transportation of dependents and/or HHG or other property of
 

individuals for whom ITOs are issued;
 

3. (a) Federal Government employees or (b) Uniformed Services
 

members, excluding retired persons (Federal employees and
 

Uniformed members on active duty are given regular TDY orders
 

unless authorized pre-employment interview travel under par.
 

C6200 and employee/member is in a leave status during such
 

travel (B-219046, September 29, 1986)). An employee/member may
 

302	 Appendix D-15 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

be included on an ITO issued to a patient when traveling as a
 

non-medical attendant.
 

C6002 ALLOWANCE EXPENSES
 

A. General. An ITO provides for travel and transportation of an
 

individual from the business place or home to the place where
 

that individual’s services are required, and return to the origin
 

point.
 

B. Transportation Modes. Authorization of transportation modes,
 

routing, and accommodations should be consistent with the
 

provisions in Chapter 2 as appropriate to mission requirements.
 

C. Witness at a Military Court-Martial. A person not in the
 

Government employ, when called as a witness before a military
 

court-martial (except to testify as a witness at a pretrial
 

investigation conducted under Article 32, Uniform Code of
 

Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §832; see par. C6000, item 10), is
 

entitled to travel and transportation allowances under Service
 

administrative regulations.


 D. Participants in Annual National Matches Sponsored Under 10
 

U.S.C. §4312. Title 10, U.S.C. §4312 authorizes payment of a
 

mileage allowance to civilian competitors while traveling to and
 

from the National Matches. The mileage allowance for the return
 

trip may be paid in advance. Provisions for payment of the travel
 

allowances are in AR 920-30. The ITOs also may authorize a
 

subsistence allowance for the duration of the competition. The
 

rate of the allowances is set by the Director for Civilian
 

Marksmanship and stated in the ITO issued to each competitor.
 

E. Attendance at an Award Ceremony. Reimbursement for travel and
 

transportation expenses ordinarily may be allowed for one
 

individual to attend a major award ceremony (for example, a
 

Presidential award ceremony, an annual award ceremony of the
 

agency or major organizational component, or a prestigious
 

honorary award ceremony sponsored by a non-Federal organization)
 

provided: 1. the travel and transportation is authorized by the
 

head of the DoD component concerned or designee; and, 2. the
 

individual is a person of the award recipient's choosing who is
 

related by blood or affinity or whose close association with the
 

award winner is the equivalent of a family relationship. The
 

reimbursement authorized in this paragraph is intended to cover
 

instances, in which the award winner and guest are geographically
 

distant from the site of the ceremony, rather than in instances
 

in which the award winner's residence is in the same area as the
 

ceremony. (For example: The award winner and spouse live in
 

Denver, CO, and the ceremony is in Washington, DC. Travel and
 

transportation allowances may be authorized for both the winner
 

and spouse.) Reimbursement under this paragraph also may be
 

authorized if the guest must travel from a location
 

geographically distant from the ceremony site but different from
 

the award winner’s location. The DoD component concerned may
 

allow attendance at Government expense of more than one
 

Appendix D-15 303 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

individual when the award winner requires assistance because of a
 

handicapping condition. Reimbursement for transportation is
 

limited to direct travel to and from the location of the ceremony
 

(including travel between common carrier terminals and hotel
 

where applicable and the site of the ceremony). Per diem is
 

allowed for direct travel to and from the location of the award
 

ceremony and for the day of the ceremony.
 

F. Travel of DoD Education Agency (DODEA) Students for Academic
 

Competitions and Co-curricular Activities. DODEA statutory
 

charter, (codified at 20 U.S.C. §921-932), authorizes travel for
 

DODEA students to academic competitions and co-curricular
 

activities. ITOs (citing DODEA appropriations) are used to
 

authorize transportation for students in support of curricular or
 

extracurricular activities. The Director, DODEA, or designee
 

determines appropriate activities. Payment of per diem,
 

reimbursement for meals and/or lodging, or incidental expenses
 

ordinarily associated with TDY shall not be authorized. C6003
 

INVITATIONAL TRAVEL ORDER The sample format contained herein may
 

be used as a guide in the preparation of an ITO in all Services.
 

Use of the sample format is not mandatory.
 

304 Appendix D-15 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-16: ARMY REGULATION 37-47 EXTRACT - USES OF 

OFFICIAL REPRESENTATION FUNDS 

Army Regulation 37–47
 

Representation Funds of the Secretary of the Army
 

Chapter 2
 

Uses of Official Representation Funds
 

2–1. Official courtesies
 

a. Official representation funds (ORFs) will primarily be used to
 

extend official courtesies to authorized guests. For guidance on
 

who may be an authorized guest, see paragraph 2–3. Official
 

courtesies will be in keeping with propriety as dictated by the
 

occasion and conducted on a modest basis, see paragraph 2–2. For
 

the purposes of this regulation, official courtesies are defined
 

as the following:
 

(1) Hosting authorized guests to maintain the standing and
 

prestige of the United States at home and abroad.
 

(2) Luncheons, dinners, receptions, and participation
 

expenses at DOD-sponsored events held in honor of authorized
 

guests.
 

(3) Entertainment of local authorized guests required to
 

maintain civic or community relations.
 

(4) Receptions for local authorized guests to meet with
 

newly assigned commanders or appropriate senior officials.
 

(5) Entertainment of authorized guests incident to visits by
 

U.S. vessels to foreign ports and visits by foreign vessels to
 

U.S. ports.
 

(6) Official functions, floral wreaths, decorations, and
 

awards, in observance of foreign national holidays and similar
 

occasions taking place in foreign countries.
 

(7) Dedications of facilities.
 

b. All official courtesies are subject to the ratio limitations
 

set forth in paragraph 2–5.
 

c. Hosts are encouraged to extend official courtesies within
 

their quarters. If the event complies with this regulation, and
 

the host obtains approval before the event, he or she may be
 

reimbursed with ORFs for expenses incurred.
 

d. Costs incidental to an event funded by representation funds
 

(e.g., salaries; airplane fuel; and travel and transportation of
 

DOD personnel, excluding those authorized by paras 2–8e(4), (5),
 

and (6)) will be charged to the normal appropriation legally
 

available for such purposes.
 

2–2. Level of expenditures
 

Appendix D-16 305 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

a. ORFs will only be expended on functions conducted on a modest
 

basis. In determining modesty, the rank and position of
 

theauthorized guest(s) may be taken into consideration.
 

Commanders are encouraged to establish expense limits for the
 

various types of expenses they commonly incur.
 

b. In furtherance of this policy, the SA has established a
 

$10,000 expense threshold for any one event. An entire visit by
 

an authorized guest constitutes one event for purposes of this
 

threshold. Any expenditure of ORFs that exceeds $10,000 must be
 

approved in advance by the SA. Requests for approval will contain
 

specific justification, the invitation list, and a cost breakdown
 

and be for-warded to Army General Counsel, ATTN: SAGC(E&F), 104
 

Army Pentagon, WASH DC 20310–0104. Such requests shall be
 

received no later than ten working days prior to the event. After
 

review, the Office of the General Counsel will forward the
 

request through the SAAA to the SA.
 

2–3. Authorized guests
 

Expenditures for official courtesies will be approved only for
 

courtesies extended to authorized guests. Authorized guests are
 

defined as:
 

a. Foreign citizens whose rank, position, function, or stature
 

justifies official entertainment. These guests may be
 

distinguished citizens, military personnel, or government
 

officials. See paragraph 2–8e for special rules.
 

b. Federal, state, county, and local government officials such as
 

the President and Vice President of the United States, Cabinet
 

members, Members of Congress and Congressional staff, state
 

governors, and city mayors.
 

c . National or regional dignitaries; citizens committees; and
 

prominent citizens of local communities who make a substantial
 

contribution to the Nation or DOD, or to the Army’s primary
 

mission. These include individuals who are recognized leaders in
 

their fields of expertise and members of the news media on
 

certain
 

occasions. This category applies particularly in foreign
 

countries where training exercises, maneuvers, community
 

relations programs, and associated military/civilian activities
 

are conducted throughout the local community.
 

2–4. Department of Defense (DOD) personnel
 

Official representation funds cannot be used solely for the
 

entertainment of, or in honor of, DOD personnel, except as
 

specifically permitted in paragraph 2–4f and 2–4g below. For
 

purposes of this regulation, DOD personnel include:
 

a. Military members of the Armed Forces and civilian employees of
 

DOD.
 

306 Appendix D-16 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

b. Spouses and dependents of military members of the Armed Forces
 

and civilian employees of DOD, unless they otherwise qualify as
 

authorized guests as defined in paragraph 2–3.
 

c. Retired military and civilian persons unless they otherwise
 

qualify as authorized guests as defined in paragraph 2– 3.
 

d. State Adjutants General who have received federal recognition
 

in any grade and any other National Guard general officers who
 

have ever received federal recognition.
 

e. Reserve forces and the Army and Air National Guard unless they
 

otherwise qualify as authorized guests as defined in paragraph 2–
 

3.
 

f. Select senior DOD personnel when on official visits to the
 

field may be extended minimally required official courtesies. The
 

term “minimally required” means small, modest functions. For
 

purposes of the ratios required by paragraph 2–5, the visiting
 

official(s) and his or her party may be counted as authorized
 

guest. These officials will normally pay their own expenses when
 

visiting Army installations. For example, when attending a
 

function held in an officer’s open mess, public restaurant, or
 

similar location where per capita charges can be identified,
 

members of the visiting party and the other participants will pay
 

their respective charges prior to departure. The select senior
 

DOD personnel are:
 

(1) Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense.
 

(2) Under Secretaries of Defense.
 

(3) Director, Defense Research and Engineering.
 

(4) Assistant Secretaries of Defense.
 

(5) Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).
 

(6) General Counsel, DOD.
 

(7) Inspector General, DOD.
 

(8) Director, Operational Test and Evaluation.
 

(9) Assistants to the Secretary of Defense.
 

(10) Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff.
 

(11) Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff.
 

(12) Director, Joint Staff.
 

(13) Unified and Specified Commanders.
 

(14) Deputy Commander in Chief, USEUCOM.
 

(15) Secretaries , Under Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, and
 

General Counsels of the Army, Air Force, and Navy.
 

(16) Chiefs and Vice Chiefs of Staff, Army and Air Force.
 

(17) Chief and Vice Chief of Naval Operations.
 

(18) Commandant and Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps.
 

(19) Directors of Defense Agencies.
 

(20) President, Uniformed Services University of the Health
 

Sciences.
 

g. Use of ORFs for retirement ceremonies or change of command
 

ceremonies for DOD civilian and military personnel is generally
 

prohibited. Within his or her discretion, the SA may approve
 

limited expenditures for such ceremonies that he or she deems in
 

the Army’s interest. Inability to meet the ratios in paragraph 2–
 

Appendix D-16 307 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

5 will not alone require denial of a request. Requests for
 

approval will be submitted as described in paragraph 2–10.
 

2–5. Required ratios of authorized guests to Department
 

of Defense personnel
 

a. Official representation funds may only finance the total cost
 

of official courtesies when the ratios in (1) and (2) below are
 

met or exceeded. Ratios are determined by comparing the number of
 

authorized guests and members of their party to the number of DOD
 

personnel. For the purpose of determining ratios, persons
 

accompanying authorized guests in accordance with paragraph 2–8e
 

are
 

counted as members of the authorized guest’s party.
 

(1) For parties of less than 30 total persons, at least 20
 

percent of the official guest list should consist of authorized
 

guests and members of their party; a ratio of one authorized
 

guest to four DOD personnel.
 

(2) For parties of 30 or more persons, at least 50 percent
 

of the official guest list should consist of authorized guests
 

and members of their party; a ratio of one authorized guest to
 

one DOD person.
 

b. If the ratios in a(1) and a(2) above are not met, DOD
 

personnel in excess of the ratios may attend by paying their prorata share of the total expenses. The additional personnel may
 

bear the cost of their attendance, or the cost may be allocated
 

among all DOD attendees. The following examples illustrate how to
 

calculate these shares.
 

(1) An official guest list contains 50 people requiring a 50
 

per-cent ratio. Ten people on the list are authorized guests.
 

Applying the one to one ratio, only 10 DOD personnel may be
 

properly funded with ORFs. These 20 people (10 authorized and 10
 

DOD) comprise 40 percent of the total guest list and, therefore,
 

ORFs may cover 40 percent of the total cost of the function. The
 

remaining 60 percent of the cost must be paid either on a pro
 

rata basis by the additional
 

30 DOD persons, or as divided among all DOD attendees. In dollar
 

terms, if the function cost $10/person, the total cost would be
 

$500. ORFs pay $200 for the 10 authorized and 10 DOD personnel.
 

The remaining 30 DOD personnel pay $300 or $10/each, their pro
 

rata share, or all 40 DOD personnel pay $7.50.
 

(2) An official guest list contains 25 people requiring a 20
 

per-cent ratio. Three people on the list are authorized guests.
 

Applying the one to four ratio, only 12 DOD personnel may also be
 

properly funded with ORFs. These 15 people (3 authorized and 12
 

DOD) comprise 60 percent of the total guest list and, therefore,
 

ORFs may cover 60 percent of the total cost of the function. The
 

remaining 40
 

percent of the cost must be paid either on a pro rata basis by
 

the additional 10 DOD persons, or as divided among all DOD
 

308 Appendix D-16 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

attendees. In dollar terms, if the function cost $16/person, the
 

total cost would be $400. ORFs pay $240 for the 3 authorized and
 

12 DOD personnel. The remaining 10 DOD personnel pay $160 or
 

$16/each, their pro rata share, or all 22 DOD personnel pay
 

$7.27.
 

c. Planning officials are reminded that these ratios are intended
 

as a minimum allowable percentage to justify the expenditure of
 

ORFs for an entire function. In no circumstance will the
 

applicable ratio be exploited to allow the attendance of more DOD
 

personnel than absolutely necessary without having to pay their
 

share of the cost of the function. The practice of adding
 

unnecessary DOD personnel
 

as function participants merely because the minimum ratio may
 

permit it, is specifically prohibited.
 

d. The following guidelines apply to leisure activities and
 

entertainment of visiting authorized guests:
 

(1) Leisure activities or entertainment or both will be
 

planned to coincide with the military orientation aspect of the
 

visit. The DA will fund these activities once or twice during the
 

visit on a modest basis.
 

(2) Absent SA approval, significant detours or deviations
 

from established itinerary to accommodate leisure activities and
 

entertainment requested by the visiting authorized guest will
 

only be arranged if the costs are borne by the visiting guests.
 

§ 2–9. Gifts
 

a. Official representation funds may be used to purchase gifts,
 

mementos, or tokens that will be presented to authorized guests
 

in connection with official courtesies.
 

(1) Gifts presented pursuant to this authority will cost no more
 

than the amount currently authorized in DOD Directive 7250.13. As
 

of the publication date of this regulation, the amount was $225.
 

(2) Gifts on behalf of the U.S. Government may be presented by
 

the Secretary of the Army, Chief of Staff, Army, Vice Chief of
 

Staff, Army, principal officials of HQDA, MACOM commanders and
 

other officials who receive a Letter of Authority from OASA(FM&C)
 

in accordance with paragraph 3–1b, and installation commanders.
 

With prior written permission from one of these senior
 

officials, subordinate officials under a presenting official’s
 

command or supervision may present a gift on the senior
 

official’s behalf. The authority may not be further delegated. If
 

the presentation is in conjunction with a function the
 

subordinate official is hosting in accordance with paragraph 2–
 

7a, permission for both the event and the gift may be contained
 

in a single document.
 

b. Gift items procured in bulk may not include the presenting
 

official’s name unless the official is the SA, CSA, or the
 

Appendix D-16 309 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-17: ARMY REGULATION 600-8-22 EXTRACT – MILITARY 

AWARDS 

ARMY REGULATION 600–8–22
 

MilitaryAwards
 

Chapter 10
 

Certificates, Memorandums, and Letters
 

Section I Overview
 

10–1. Intent
 

This chapter outlines the policies and procedures governing
 

eligibility
 

criteria and issuance of various certificates and letters.
 

10–2. Prohibitions
 

a. Embossed or engraved certificates other than those
 

specifically
 

authorized by the Secretary of the Army will not be issued.
 

b. The social security number will not be entered on the
 

certificate due to the provisions of the Privacy Act.
 

10–7. Certificate of Achievement
 

Commanders may recognize periods of faithful service, acts, or
 

chievements which do not meet the standards required for
 

decorations by issuing to individual U.S. military personnel a DA
 

Form 2442 (Certificate of Achievement) or a Certificate of
 

Achievement of local design.
 

a. Certificates of Achievement will be issued under such
 

regulations
 

as the local commander may prescribe.
 

b. If a locally designed Certificate of Achievement is
 

printed for use according to this regulation, it may bear
 

reproductions of insignia. In the interest of economy, the use of
 

color will be held to a minimum.
 

c. The citation on such certificates will not be worded so
 

that the
 

act of service performed appears to warrant the award of a
 

decoration.
 

d. No distinguishing device is authorized for wear to
 

indicate the
 

receipt of a Certificate of Achievement.
 

e. Copies of Certificates of Achievement or memorandum of
 

310 Appendix D-17 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

record stating that a Certificate of Achievement has been awarded
 

and citing the service recognized will be distributed to the
 

individuals Military Personnel Records Jacket and Official
 

Military Personnel File per AR 600–8–104.
 

f. Certificates of Achievement may be awarded to Department
 

of
 

the Army civilians as specified in AR 672–20.
 

a . The CGs, TRADOC, FORSCOM , State adjutants general,
 

Army Reserve General Officer Commands, Corps, and the U.S. Army
 

Military District of Washington are authorized to make this
 

award.
 

b. Certificates will be presented by the awarding commander or by
 

an authorized representative, as appropriate.
 

c. The above commanders are authorized to reproduce locally
 

certificates substantially as shown in figure 10–1. In the
 

interest of economy the use of multiple color inks will be held
 

to a minimum.
 

Chapter 11
 

Trophies and Similar Devices Awarded in
 

Recognition of Accomplishments
 

11–1. Intent
 

a. Trophies and similar devices may be presented to military
 

members, units, or Department of the Army agencies for excellence
 

in accomplishments or competitions which clearly contribute to
 

the increased effectiveness or efficiency of the military unit,
 

that is, tank gunnery, weapons competition, and military aerial
 

competition.
 

b. Intramural and athletic competitions may also be recognized.
 

Implementing instructions for these programs are contained in AR
 

215–1, chapters 2 and 3 and appendix C and AR 215–2, chapter 6.
 

11–2. Award Guidelines
 

a. Contests and events for which trophies are to be presented
 

will be announced officially. They will be conducted within a
 

stated period. All eligible members, units, and agencies will be
 

given an equal chance to compete.
 

b. Contests and events will be of a continuing nature. However,
 

awards may be made on a one-time basis where the achievement is
 

unique and clearly contributes to increased effectiveness.
 

c. Trophies and similar devices should be properly displayed.
 

Appendix D-17 311 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

d. Coordination will be accomplished to prevent one member, unit,
 

or agency from receiving two awards for an achievement when other
 

candidates are equally qualified.
 

11–3. Items to be awarded
 

Trophies include but will not be limited to, loving cups,
 

plaques, badges, buttons, and similar objects which represent the
 

type of achievement or contest . Cash prizes or savings bonds are
 

not authorized. Commanders who approve the purchase of the award
 

will set the monetary limits. However, such awards will not
 

exceed the value of $75 for an individual award or $250 for a
 

team award. Exceptions will be specifically approved by the
 

appropriate MACOM or principal HQDA official. Cash prizes awarded
 

under the provisions of AR 672–20 are excluded from the
 

provisions of
 

this regulation.
 

11–4. Use of appropriated funds
 

Appropriated funds will be used to purchase the items to be
 

awarded. MACOM commanders, State adjutants general, and principal
 

HQDA officials may authorize their subordinate commanders to use
 

appropriated funds as required.
 

312 Appendix D-17 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-18: THE DENTON PROGRAM
 

The Denton Program
 

The Denton Program allows donors to use space available on U.S. Military cargo 

planes to transport humanitarian goods and equipment to countries in need. 

A. Overview 

The Denton Amendment is a commodities transportation program that is jointly 

administered by USAID, the Department of State (DOS), and the Department of 

Defense (DoD). It allows for the transport of humanitarian goods on a space 

available basis using U.S. Military transportation. The program was initially 

created to use the extra space on U.S. cargo aircraft that were flying supplies 

into Central America. Although the program expanded to include most areas of 

the world, the likelihood of obtaining transportation decreases as the distance to 

the country increases. Since Denton is a space available program, it is 

impossible to predict when transportation will materialize; therefore, no 

guarantees can be made regarding completion of a shipment. 

B. Program Purpose and Objectives 

To put the empty space on U.S. Military transport to good use by providing 

humanitarian relief transportation for nongovernmental organizations or private 

citizens, at little or no cost to themselves. 

C. Program Guidelines 

The donor should always keep in mind that the Denton Program offers free 

transportation on a space available basis. It cannot be undertaken at any cost to 

the U.S. Government other than the cost of transportation itself. Applications in 

which the donor seeks financing for any cost other than the military transport, 

such as storage or local transportation, will not be approved. Following is a 

synopsis of the four stages of the Denton Program. 

Application 

•	 Before gathering supplies, a prospective donor must contact 

USAID/Washington to determine whether the program is possible in the 

specific country. 

•	 The donor must identify an in-country consignee and/or local contact who 

will: (a) secure the approval of the host government by arranging with a 

customs official to obtain either duty-free entry or provide tariffs for entry; 

(b) ensure compliance with all legal requirements in the country; (c) 

receive and take possession of cargo on arrival; and (d) distribute cargo to 

the beneficiaries. 

Appendix D-18	 313 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Cargo and Shipping 

• The donor must package the material and or goods in compliance with 

U.S. Military procedures. 

•	 Because this is a space available program, DoD cannot schedule 

transportation for Denton Program cargo or assure that items will arrive on 

a particular date. For this reason, time-sensitive cargo, such as medical 

supplies with an expiration date within nine months will not be shipped, 

and perishable food cannot be accepted. Donors must also be able to 

store or pay for commercial storage until transportation becomes 

available. 

•	 Once an application is received, USAID and the DOS will determine 

whether the application is consistent with U.S. foreign policy objectives. If 

this and the other requirements of the Denton Program are met, DoD also 

will review the application to determine feasibility for transport. USAID will 

communicate with the destination country to ensure the cargo will be 

acceptable. Once these steps have been taken, the application will then 

be formally approved or disapproved and the donor will be notified. 

Depending on the workload and the responsiveness of the destination 

country, this process can take from several weeks to several months. 

•	 The cargo will then be inspected at the warehousing site by 

representatives of the U.S. Government. The inspection team reserves the 

right to remove items from the inventory which, for reasons of safety or 

legality, may not be shipped under the Denton Program. 

•	 DoD will contact the donor when space becomes available for the 

approved cargo. At that time, the donor will be told when and where to 

deliver the cargo. 

•	 The donor must be aware that application approval does not obligate the 

U.S. Government to provide transportation for approved cargo. Even after 

delivery to a United States Military base, as directed, there can be no 

guarantees that the shipment will be transported, since DoD cannot plan 

or create space availability. Although such instances are rare, it may be 

necessary for the donor to reclaim the shipment if the planned 

transportation does not occur and there is no transportation in the 

foreseeable future. 

Arrival 

•	 The donor must provide or pay all costs of local storage or shipping. 

Cargo must arrive at the departure location within the time-frame dictated 

by DoD. Early or late arrival, or any non-compliance with theses guidelines 

will result in the return of the cargo to the donor, at the donor's costs. 

•	 Expeditious removal of the cargo from the point of entry is required. The 

donor must communicate with the consignee in the destination country the 

date and time of arrival. The consignee must take possession of the cargo 

and ensure that the cargo clears customs and other legal requirements in 

the country. 

314	 Appendix D-18 
 

______ 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Distribution and Reporting 

•	 The consignee is responsible for timely distribution of the cargo to the 

targeted beneficiaries. Supplies must be distributed in a non-commercial 

basis, free of cost to the recipients. 

•	 The donor will submit a report to USAID/Washington within 30 days after 

the supplies are distributed, describing in detail how they were in fact 

distributed, to whom, and how the supplies where used. 

For detailed instructions see the Guidelines for Transportation Under the Denton 

Program: Section G (PDF) 

D. Relationship to PVC's Strategic Plan 

The Denton Program is the most inexpensive way for PVOs to mobilize 

resources. Because of the planning and unilateral coordination needed for a 

successful transport, the Program demands that a PVO organize its 

administrative system and more often than not, partner with local NGOs to 

deliver the materials once in the recipient country. 

G. Key Program Statistics 

FY '98 

Shipments Completed: 108 

Tonnage Requested: 3.5 million pounds 

Tonnage Shipped: 2.4 million pounds 

Number of Countries Served: 38 

H. Contact Person 

Kevin Rafferty, Manager, Commodities Freight Program 

Tel: (202) 712-4795 

Fax: (202) 216-3041 

E-Mail Contact: krafferty@usaid.gov 

DENTON PROGRAM APPLICATION FORMS – AVAILABLE ON LINE at 

Appendix D-18	 315 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-19: USIA NEWS ARTICLE
 

U.S. Military quadruples personnel aiding Hurricane Mitch recovery 

Source: US Information Agency (USIA) 

Date: 19 Nov 1998 

(General Wilhelm says reconstruction to begin November 26) (700) 

By Jacquelyn S. Porth, USIA Security Affairs Correspondent 

Washington -- The commander of the U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) 

says the United States is planning to quadruple the number of military personnel 

deployed to Central America to carry out disaster relief efforts. 

"It is the biggest task undertaken in the context of humanitarian assistance 

and disaster relief operations by SOUTHCOM in recent history," according to 

Marine Corps General Charles Wilhelm who briefed Defense Secretary Cohen 

and Deputy Defense Secretary John Hamre on the three-phase U.S. military 

effort on November 19. 

Following the briefing, Wilhelm met with reporters to discuss what he 

termed "the most devastating storm to hit Central America" in more than 200 

years. Hurricane Mitch has caused widespread damage to 40 percent of Central 

America's landmass, he said, in Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and 

Honduras, the nation hardest hit by the disaster. 

Wilhelm, who recently returned from Central America, said 9,860 people had 

died in the hurricane and another 13,225 are still missing. A staggering 

3,200,198 persons have been displaced or rendered homeless. 

Apart from the human tragedy, Wilhelm cited the enormous damage to the 

infrastructure of Central America, including 352 bridges, some 50 percent of the 

major bridges in the region. This statistic, he said, "illustrates the magnitude of 

the reconstruction task." 

U.S. forces began contingency operations for the hurricane even before it 

hit land in October, thereby ensuring that relief efforts were an "instant 

response," Wilhelm said. During Phase One of the U.S. operation, he said, 1,377 

U.S. military personnel helped save the lives of 700 individuals. They also 

distributed 1,141,560 kilograms of food; 42,525 kilograms of medical supplies; 

and 264,860 liters of water. 

Wilhelm said U.S. assistance began even before the hurricane rains had 

stopped. Initially, a military base of operations was established at Soto Cano Air 

Force Base in Honduras. Forward bases were then established in locations such 

316 Appendix D-19 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

as La Ceiba, Honduras, and Guatemala City, Guatemala. This facilitated flights 

by 39 helicopters and six fixed-wing aircraft. The United States expects to spend 

about $35 million on the emergency assistance phase, which will end next week. 

Phase Two of the relief operation, which will begin November 26, "will 

focus on rehabilitating essential infrastructure throughout the region to 

reestablish national capabilities to provide for health and basic welfare of the 

populace," Wilhelm said, "including opening and clearing main roads, rebuilding 

main bridges, restoring power generation capabilities, digging wells, providing 

medical support, and rebuilding key structures." 

The U.S. will devote 5,700 personnel drawn from all four military services 

to the second phase of the relief operation, according to Wilhelm. Twenty more 

helicopters and four fixed-wing aircraft will be devoted to regional relief efforts. 

Assets needed to carry out this phase of operations, including engineers and 

heavy equipment, will arrive via 80 C-141 military airlifts and four sealifts. The 

overall effort is designed to try to restore damaged infrastructure "as quickly as 

possible," the commander said. 

A third phase, the restoration phase, will focus on long-term efforts to 

permanently repair infrastructure, rebuild economies, and mitigate storm damage 

to the greatest extent possible, Wilhelm said. This will include building clinics, 

schools, and wells. The U.S. military role will decrease in the final phase, he said, 

as the role of non-governmental organizations and interagency groups increases. 

The countries that were devastated by Hurricane Mitch now are facing the 

outbreak of disease, the destruction of key staple crops such as bananas and 

beans, and the threat of anti-personnel landmines which were washed to new 

locations by the flood waters. 

The people of the region "need a fresh form of employment," Wilhelm 

noted. With the help of international aid, he said, the affected countries are 

"forging plans to provide for the resettlement of some of their people and the 

rebuilding of some of the homes that were damaged" during flooding. All in all, he 

said, it will take "a large effort over time involving the international community" to 

solve the problems. 

Appendix D-19 317 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-20: INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE RED CROSS 

SITUATION REPORT NO. 2 

Source: IFRC 

Date: 12 Nov 1998 

Central America: Hurricane Mitch Situation Report No. 2 

appeal no. 33/98 

situation report no. 02 

period covered: 2 to 11 November 1998 

With the death toll of Hurricane Mitch now estimated as at least 9,000 and the 

numbers of people affected at between three and four million, National Societies in the 

region are fielding thousands of volunteers for search and rescue efforts, setting up and 

supplying evacuee shelters and packing and distributing food parcels. In response to 

the Federation appeal, participating National Societies are flying in relief supplies and 

equipment and making technical personnel available. Safe water is a major concern as 

are transportation difficulties. 

The context

 Authorities in Central America are calling Hurricane Mitch the worst storm in 200 

years. In only ten days (October 22-31), Mitch killed at least 9,000 people and caused 

billions of dollars of damage. Thousands more are reported missing, but their true 

number will probably never be known. Almost 1.5 million people have been evacuated 

to shelters and some four million people in all are affected.

 In Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala, the worst-hit countries, vast tracts of land 

are under water. Crops and livestock have been wiped out. Economic development, it is 

surmised, has been set back 20 or 30 years. The destruction of bridges, roads, airports 

and telecommunications is seriously hampering search and rescue activities and relief 

distributions. The other nations in Central America -- Costa Rica, Panama, El Salvador 

and Belize -- though not as badly affected, are also struggling to help thousands of 

victims. 

The situation, country by country, is as follows: 

HONDURAS 

The worst-hit country. Almost 90% of the territory has been ravaged by the hurricane 

and 50% of the population has been affected, with one million homeless. 70% of the 

farm land is under water. There is severe flooding on the Atlantic coast and the capital, 

Tegucigalpa, is cut off. A state of national emergency is still in effect and curfew hours 

318 Appendix D-20 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

have been established. 

NICARAGUA 

The entire country has been affected by rains, and floods have engulfed central and 

north east areas; 80% of the crops have been lost. 

GUATEMALA 

The storm left 228 dead and forced at least 82,000 from their homes. Subsistence 

farmers have lost 80% of their crops. 

EL SALVADOR

 East Salvador, along the border with Honduras, and islands in the Gulf of Fonseca, 

are the worst affected areas. 75% crop losses. 

COSTA RICA 

Torrential rains caused severe flooding on the Pacific coast; 37 cantons and the 

capital city are affected. 

BELIZE

 Severe flooding occurred in coastal areas, including the capital, where 75,000 had to 

be evacuated. 

PANAMA 

Although some flooding occurred on the Atlantic coast, Mitch's impact was minor 

and international aid is not required. The weather in Central America has returned to 

normal for this time of the year. Seasonal rainfall is falling on already water-logged 

territory which cannot drain properly, leaving low-lying lands under several inches of 

water. Little by little, heavy machinery is clearing highways, opening the way for 

humanitarian assistance to reach victims. Neighbouring countries are lending 

helicopters and personnel for the evacuation effort. 

Latest events 

The Federation launched an emergency appeal on 4 November for CHF 12,570,000 

in cash, kind and services to assist 180,000 beneficiaries for three months. (The appeal 

was originally for Central America and Mexico. It has been renamed, omitting mention 

of Mexico, since damage there was minor, compared to other countries.) 

The duration of the storm, the scale of the damage it caused and the number of 

countries it affected have overwhelmed the region's response capacity. The resources 

Appendix D-20 319 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

of the Central American Red Cross Societies have been stretched to the limit and many 

of their workers are close to exhaustion, after weeks of non-stop efforts. Their 

operations are also seriously hampered by the breakdown of communications, the 

destruction of roads and bridges and a shortage of transport. 

Co-ordination difficulties

 Internationally, the massive mobilisation of assistance is proving difficult to channel. 

Spontaneous initiatives are bypassing co-ordination systems, and creating a major relief 

management challenge. Outside specialists who are being rushed to the area and VIP 

visits are tying up urgently needed resources. Hard information on needs, quantities 

and beneficiary numbers are difficult to come by, because of communications 

difficulties, and what information is available is not being linked effectively enough to the 

mobilisation of aid by the donor community elsewhere in the world. 

Federation measures 

The Federation Secretariat is taking a number of immediate measures to reinforce 

the co-ordination of Red Cross/Red Crescent assistance to the region. 

•	 Three seasoned relief co-ordinators will be assigned to Honduras and Nicaragua, 

to work with the National Societies in the organisation of relief delivery systems. 

The first arrived in Honduras yesterday. 

•	 The Secretariat is convening donors to a co-ordination meeting in Geneva next 

Monday, 16 November. 

•	 Secretariat officials will hold a co-ordination meeting today with UN OCHA
 

officials in Geneva.
 

•	 The Federation is preparing to send a team to the region in the near future to 

focus on rehabilitation in co-ordination with the Regional Delegation and the 

ONS. The team will be led by the Disaster Policy Director Peter Walker. 

Red Cross/Red Crescent action

 National Societies in Central America have mobilised more than 8,000 volunteers as 

well as all their staff to bring relief to the victims of Mitch. Working in co-operation with 

governments and other aid agencies, they have helped evacuate more than 1.3 million 

people. They are also working in some 700 shelters, bringing first aid services, 

distributing food, water and clothes to people housed there.

 In continuing efforts to assist victims, the Central American Societies are focusing 

efforts and resources on three fronts: health, rescue and logistics. 

Health - The priority is the provision of clean water to hundreds of thousands of people 

left homeless and destitute, to avoid the spread of diarrhoeal diseases, such as cholera, 

as well as skin and eye infections. Decomposing bodies are being dug out of the mud 

and removed from rivers. 

320	 Appendix D-20 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Rescue - As many as 40,000 people in the region may still be isolated, with little or no 

food or water. Some have spent days on the roofs of their houses or in trees, suffering 

from hunger, sunburn and dehydration. Efforts to reach them and bring them to safety 

are underway, but face major logistics difficulties. 

Logistics - As international aid begins to arrive, the massive destruction wrought to 

roads, bridges and telecommunications is still hampering relief efforts. Governments are 

clearing roads with heavy equipment and working to re-establish telephone lines. More 

than 90% of Central American commerce depends on road transportation. 

The Federation Regional Delegation in Guatemala City with its six delegates (head 

of delegation, finance, disaster preparedness, health, information and youth) is coordinating incoming information and requests for relief assistance from the National 

Societies of the affected countries. It has helped co-ordinate the transfer of funds 

directly to the NS to purchase emergency relief goods. To increase the disaster 

information flow and co-ordinate media coverage, it has sent its information delegate to 

the most affected areas. The Secretariat has sent two officers to support the Regional 

Delegation -- an interim head of delegation, and an information officer. 

HONDURAS 

The Honduran Red Cross has already distributed more than 6,000 family parcels, 

containing rice, beans, corn, sugar, soap and toothpaste. Some 3,000 Red Cross 

volunteers continue to help unload humanitarian supplies from planes and trucks, 

transporting them to warehouses and re-packing them into family packs. They are 

ensuring shelters are supplied with essential goods. 

The Federation Secretariat organised the despatch of an assessment team of three 

delegates from the Swedish and Austrian Red Cross and has co-ordinated the shipping 

of an Austrian Red Cross Specialised Water ERU and a Swedish Red Cross Mass 

Water and Sanitation ERU. One will be based in Tegucigalpa and the second in San 

Pedro Sula. Both the Secretariat and the Regional Delegation have helped the National 

Society in contacts with the British Royal Navy which has offered helicopters for the 

relief operation. 

Twelve volunteers from the Mexican Red Cross with emergency medical experience 

are providing first aid at the Choluteca Red Cross branch. The Costa Rican Red Cross 

and the Red Cross of El Salvador have sent 12 and 20 volunteers respectively to assist 

the Honduran Red Cross in search and rescue efforts along their shared borders. 

The first planeload of emergency supplies from the Spanish Red Cross has arrived. 

The National Society also sent an emergency response telecommunications unit and 

four delegates to the country. The British Red Cross sent a planeload of supplies (6 

WHO medical kits, chlorine tablets and blankets), with two delegates. Other delegates 

have been assigned to the country by the German and American Red Cross. 

Appendix D-20 321 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

NICARAGUA
 

The Nicaragua Red Cross mobilised 2,000 volunteers to help rescue people 

stranded by the cyclone and provide them with food, water and first aid. They are now 

organising emergency supplies for evacuee centres. The Nicaraguan Red Cross has 

three medical brigades in the field. Hundreds of Red Cross volunteers worked for days 

to try and rescue people from the huge mudslide at the Casitas Volcano that buried 

several villages.

 On 9 November, the Regional Delegation sent a delegate to assist the NS with the 

purchasing of goods, further damage assessment and implementation of the plan of 

action for future relief efforts. The Secretariat has made an initial transfer of funds for 

operating expenses. It is arranging for a German Red Cross ERU in Peru to be shipped 

to Nicaragua. A German Red Cross delegate will arrive shortly to identify the best 

location for this equipment. 

The Mexican Red Cross has sent a team of 12 volunteers to Nicaragua to assist the 

NS with pre-hospital care and general medical assistance to the hurricane victims. The 

Spanish Red Cross has flown in 50 tons of relief supplies and four delegates and sent 

funds. The Italian Red Cross and the American Red Cross have announced support for 

needs assessments. 

GUATEMALA 

The Guatemalan Red Cross has had a good response to its local appeal and is 

distributing clothing, food and water to the shelters. Its branches are co-ordinating 

efforts with other NGOs such as the Boy Scouts. The Society is also sending mobile 

medical units to the outlying provinces along both coastlines, which are still under about 

30 cms. of water. 

The Secretariat Information Officer assigned to the Regional Delegation has begun a 

tour of the affected area and is expected to report back on her findings shortly. The 

Spanish Red Cross has transferred funds and is sending personnel, as is the Italian 

Red Cross. 

EL SALVADOR 

The National Society is purchasing basic food items for family packages, and is 

acquiring radio equipment. 

COSTA RICA 

Thanks to media coverage the National Society has received enormous amounts of 

supplies, chiefly used clothing, which its volunteers are distributing, both within the 

country and in Nicaraguan border areas. It has sent five containers to Honduras and El 

Salvador, and is planning to ship up to six more containers. 

322 Appendix D-20 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

BELIZE AND PANAMA - Information is awaited from these National Societies. 

Tracing 

Three experienced Disaster Welfare Inquiries (DWI) officers from the Mexican Red 

Cross will be sent to the disaster zone to assist the National Societies set up a DWI 

service. The delegates will be based in Tegucigalpa, Honduras; Managua, Nicaragua 

and San Salvador, El Salvador. The moratorium on tracing requests will be lifted once 

the systems are operational. 

Outstanding Needs 

Needs in this emergency phase fall into three categories: 

FOODSTUFFS - Basic foodstuffs for family packages. Land and air transport for the 

distribution phase is also needed. 

HEALTH - The most urgent need is for water purification supplies, including chlorine in 

all its forms - liquid bleach, chlorine tablets, etc. Also needed are: medicines (WHO 

kits), antivenin serum to treat snake bites, insecticides, and garbage removal equipment 

. 

NOTE: The national Health Departments of each country are evaluating sanitation and 

health needs with assistance from PAHO to determine future priorities. However, it is 

already clear that the only needs are for medicines and medical equipment and 

supplies; there is absolutely no need for expatriate doctors . 

RESCUE EQUIPMENT - personal protection equipment for volunteers, such as boots, 

hard hats, gloves, raincoats, tools, etc. are needed 

External relations - Government/UN/NGOs/Media

 Each National Society is co-ordinating its relief efforts with its government. In 

Honduras a Mitch Emergency Task Force has been set up, presided by the President of 

the country; its members include representatives of the Armed Forces, municipalities 

and NGOs, and the Red Cross.

 In health matters, the Red Cross is co-ordinating with the Ministries of Health, OPS, 

Médecins sans Frontières and other NGOs. All the national societies of the region are 

assisting their Ministries of Health during vaccination campaigns, utilising MoH supplies. 

Conclusion

 As the extent of the devastation in Central America emerges, it is becoming 

increasingly obvious that recovery will take years, if not decades. 

This will be one of the most challenging operations the Federation and the National 

Appendix D-20 323 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Societies have ever undertaken in the Americas region. A vast area has to be covered 

and logistics and co-ordination have to be organised in four, possibly five, different 

countries. 

The Federation thanks all donors who responded so promptly to its appeal and have 

sent or announced their support. It calls for continuing support to reach the appeal 

target, since needs remain extremely high not only for the emergency relief operations 

but for the rehabilitation and reconstruction phase. Finally, it urges all donors, when 

planning support for the Appeal, to bear in mind that co-ordination of efforts is essential. 

Staff in the Secretariat's Americas Department and Disaster Response Support service 

are available for further information. 

Santiago Gil 

Director 

Americas Department 

Peter Rees-Gildea 

Director 

Operations Funding and Reporting Department 

324 Appendix D-20 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-21: USAID/OFDA HURRICANE MITCH FACT SHEET #4
 

Source: US Agency for International Development (USAID) 

Date: 2 Nov 1998 

Central America - Hurricane Mitch Fact Sheet #4 

U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

BUREAU FOR HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE (BHR) 

OFFICE OF U.S. FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE (OFDA) 

Background: Hurricane Mitch began as a tropical depression more than ten 

days ago. It quickly developed into one of the strongest hurricanes to hit the 

Caribbean, dumping heavy rains all along the Central American coastline. 

The hurricane was downgraded to a tropical storm on October 30 and to a 

tropical depression on October 31. At its height on October 26 and 27, the 

hurricane had sustained winds of 180 mph. As of early evening on November 

1, the storm was located near Tapachula, Guatemala on Mexico's southern 

Pacific coast (near the border with Guatemala). At that time, the storm was 

traveling at 8 mph in a west-northwesterly direction.

 Maximum sustained winds had dissipated to 30 mph. Heavy rains and 

high winds continue to affect Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, and the 

southeastern portion of Mexico. Adverse weather conditions are hampering 

damage assessment capabilities and delivery of relief supplies to affected 

countries. As of today, USAID/OFDA activated a Disaster Assistance 

Response Team (DART) to manage and coordinate the U.S. Government 

relief effort in Central America.

 Senior Regional Advisor Paul Bell, the DART team leader, is based in the 

U.S. Embassy in San Jose, Costa Rica. 

Honduras: Honduras continues to suffer the brunt of the storm. After being 

stalled for more than 48 hours off the country's northern coast, the storm 

traveled inland over Honduras on October 30 and 31. Extensive flooding and 

wind damage is being reported on the northern coast and in the Bay Islands. 

The National Emergency Commission (COPECO) confirms 254 deaths as a 

result of the storm. According to COPECO and the Ministry of Health, as of 

October 30, over 120,000 people had been evacuated from affected areas to 

temporary shelters. Honduran officials report that at least 15,000 houses 

have been destroyed along the Atlantic coast and that as many as 100 

bridges have been damaged or destroyed. Assessments conducted by 

COPECO indicate that the Bay Islands of Guanaja, Roatan, and Utila and the 

areas of La Ceiba, Tocoa, and Trujillo are the most severely affected. La 

Appendix D-21 325 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Ceiba is flooded and essentially cut-off, with both the Danto and Cangrejal 

rivers overflowing their banks. San Pedro Sula, the second largest city in 

Honduras, is one meter under water. Riots are occurring on the outer islands 

of Honduras, where food and water are in short supply.

 On October 27, the U.S. Ambassador to Honduras James F. Creagan 

declared a disaster due to the effects of Hurricane Mitch. USAID/OFDA 

responded immediately by providing a total of $125,000 to the USAID Mission 

in Honduras for the local purchase and transport of critical relief supplies, 

including food, simple cooking stoves, blankets, and medical supplies. 

USAID/OFDA also provided a total of $750,000 for the deployment of U.S. 

Department of Defense (DOD) aircraft to assist in overflight assessments, 

search and rescue operations, and delivery of relief supplies. These 

USAID/OFDA-funded aircraft missions have been hampered to date by poor 

visibility. USAID/OFDA will provide a total of 460 rolls of plastic sheeting, 

twenty 10,000-liter water bladders, and 10,000 five-gallon water jugs to 

Honduras. 

The first airlift carrying USAID/OFDA relief supplies arrived at La Ceiba on 

October 31 and the second arrived at Soto Cano on November 1. A third 

airlift will deliver the remainder of USAID/OFDA relief supplies to Soto Cano 

on November 2. On November 1, USAID/OFDA provided $200,000 to the 

USAID Mission and $400,000 to local PVOs in Honduras for the purchase 

and delivery of local relief supplies.

 Seven USAID/OFDA disaster specialists have been deployed to Honduras 

to assist in the response to this disaster. A USAID/OFDA/LAC Regional 

Advisor and consultant arrived in San Pedro Sula on October 27 to assist 

COPECO's Emergency Operations Center with assessment and response 

activities. A USAID/OFDA Information Specialist and a Miami-Dade disaster 

specialist arrived in La Ceiba on October 31 to assist with assessment efforts 

and reporting requirements. Two additional Miami-Dade personnel arrived in 

Tegucigalpa on November 1. They will travel to Soto Cano today, where they 

will meet up with a seventh USAID/OFDA disaster specialist who will 

coordinate the U.S. DOD aircraft logistics. 

Nicaragua: Heavy rains resulting from Mitch continue to cause serious 

flooding throughout Nicaragua. Rivers in the northern Atlantic coastal areas 

and in Esteli, Jinotega, Matagalpa, and Chinandega have overflowed their 

banks, causing serious mudslides. A single mudslide in the northwestern 

province of Chinandega has increased the Nicaraguan death toll to 1,212, 

and left over 2,000 people missing from ten communities situated at the base 

of the Casitas Volcano. The U.S. Embassy in Managua reports that 415,000 

people are displaced nationwide. Damage to roads and bridges and to the 

agricultural sector are significant. The Pan American Health Organization 

reports that damage to the transportation network equals approximately $16 

326 Appendix D-21 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

million. Figures of damage to the agricultural sector have not yet been 

released. 

On October 29, U.S. Ambassador to Nicaragua Lino Gutierrez declared a 

disaster due to continued flooding. USAID/OFDA responded by immediately 

providing $25,000 for the local purchase of critical relief supplies, including 

medicines and food.

 USAID/OFDA deployed a Regional Advisor to Nicaragua on October 31 to 

assist with assessment and response activities. A USAID/OFDA-funded 

Miami-Dade disaster specialist will arrive in Nicaragua on November 2 to 

assist with national-level search and rescue operations. On November 2, 

USAID/OFDA deployed two U.S. DOD Blackhawk helicopters and one 

Chinook (at a cost of $250,000) to assist with search and rescue efforts and 

delivery of relief supplies. An airlift of USAID/OFDA relief supplies, consisting 

of 200 rolls of plastic sheeting, 3,000 polyester blankets, 1,000 wool blankets, 

ten 10,000-gallon water bladders, and 5,000 five-gallon water jugs, will arrive 

in Managua on November 3. 

Belize: The Government of Belize established an Emergency Operations 

Center in Belize City to prepare for the storm's arrival and evacuated over 

75,000 people from Belize City and the coastal islands to temporary shelters 

in Belmopan. Despite initial concerns, the hurricane did not directly strike 

Belize. Nonetheless, heavy rains caused flooding throughout the coastal 

areas particularly in Belize City. The Government of Belize has granted 

permission for residents to return to Belize City, however many families 

continue to remain in Belmopan.

 On October 29, U.S. Charge d'Affaires Joel Danies declared a disaster for 

Belize due to the on-going effects of Hurricane Mitch. In response, 

USAID/OFDA immediately provided $25,000 for the local purchase of food to 

be distributed to affected populations in shelters. In addition, USAID/OFDA 

provided $250,000 in funding for two U.S. DOD Blackhawk helicopters based 

in Honduras to conduct overflight assessments and possible evacuations. 

Weather conditions never permitted these aircraft to fly and funding for them 

has since been shifted to cover air support needs in Nicaragua. A four-person 

USAID/OFDA assessment team (comprised of a USAID/OFDA/LAC Regional 

Advisor and three Miami-Dade disaster specialists) arrived in Belize on 

October 29 and departed on October 31. The team assessed current needs 

of the evacuated population and reported that food stocks were adequate in 

Belmopan, but in short supply in Belize City. The team also reported that 

sanitation and hygiene were poor in all flood-affected areas. 

Guatemala: The storm moved northwestard across Guatemala on November 

1, causing heavy rains and precipitating flooding. Rivers in the Atlantic and 

central regions of Guatemala continue to rise. Between 12,000 to 14,000 

people are currently seeking safety in shelters. An unconfirmed number of 

Appendix D-21 327 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

homes, bridges, and roads have been damaged by flood waters. Officials 

verify a total of 31 deaths. The national emergency office (CONRED) took 

steps to evacuate 5,969 people prior to the storm's arrival.

 A USAID/OFDA/LAC consultant arrived in Guatemala on October 27 to 

assist CONRED and to provide regular updates to the USAID Mission and 

OFDA/LAC regional office in San Jose. On October 31, Ambassador Donald 

J. Planty declared a disaster for Guatemala. In response, USAID/OFDA 

provided $25,000 through the U.S. Embassy to Catholic Relief Services for 

the local purchase of food. USAID/OFDA deployed a Regional Advisor to 

Guatemala on November 1 to join the USAID/OFDA/LAC consultant in 

damage assessments and oversight of USAID/OFDA assistance. 

USAID/OFDA will deliver 90 rolls of plastic sheeting, 3,000 polyester 

blankets, 2,350 five-gallon water jugs, and three 3,000-gallon water bladders 

to Guatemala on November 4. 

El Salvador: Preliminary reports indicate that 144 people are dead as a 

result of flash floods in El Salvador. Ambassador Anne W. Patterson declared 

a disaster in El Salvador on November 1. In response, USAID/OFDA 

provided $25,000 to provide for the immediate needs of flood victims. In 

addition, USAID/OFDA will deliver 117 rolls of plastic sheeting, 5,150 

polyester blankets, 6,000 five-gallon water jugs, and four 3,000-gallon water 

bladders on November 4. A Miami-Dade disaster specialist arrived in El 

Salvador on November 1 to assist a USAID/OFDA/LAC consultant in the 

coordination of relief operations. The provision of additional USAID/OFDA 

assistance will be based upon the recommendations of the USAID/OFDAdeployed disaster specialist. 

Costa Rica: Heavy rains along the entire Pacific coast of Costa Rica 

prompted the National Emergency Commission to evacuate at risk 

populations. The Government of Costa Rica (GOCR) recently granted 

permission for people to return to their homes. According to GOCR officials, 

approximately 4,000 people are homeless and seven people are dead as a 

result of the storm.

 On October 23, the U.S. Charge d'Affaires to Costa Rica Richard L. 

Baltimore III declared a disaster due to severe flooding induced by Hurricane 

Mitch. USAID/OFDA responded by providing a total of $45,000 to the U.S. 

Embassy in San Jose. Funds are being used for the rental of local helicopters 

to assist with overflight assessments and the delivery of food, water, and 

medicine to affected populations. No additional USAID/OFDA assistance is 

anticipated. Three USAID/OFDA personnel, including an Information 

Specialist, deployed to San Jose to help coordinate the regional response. 

Mexico: The Mexican Government established plans to evacuate vulnerable 

coastal areas and the Mexican Red Cross pre-positioned a team of disaster 

328 Appendix D-21 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

response specialists in the Yucatan Peninsula in the event that the hurricane 

struck Mexico. USAID/OFDA/LAC maintains constant communication with 

USG and Mexican disaster officials, who are monitoring the effects of 

continued rainfall. USAID/OFDA remains prepared to respond to requests for 

assistance in Mexico.

 USAID/OFDA will continue to closely monitor the situation throughout the 

Caribbean, maintaining a high level of preparedness and ability to quickly 

respond to changing needs and situations. 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Honduras: $1,726,650 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Nicaragua: $360,000 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Belize: $25,000 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Guatemala: $64,172 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in El Salvador: $82,152 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Costa Rica: $45,000 

* USAID/OFDA Assistance to the Region: $10,000 

Total USAID/OFDA Assistance for Hurricane Mitch (to date): $2,312,974 

* Region-wide assistance was used for the transportation of USAID/OFDAdeployed personnel. 

Appendix D-21 329 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX D-22: USAID/OFDA HURRICANE MITCH FACT SHEET #11
 

Source: US Agency for International Development (USAID) 

Date: 11 Nov 1998 

Central America - Hurricane Mitch Fact Sheet #11 

U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
 

BUREAU FOR HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE (BHR)
 

OFFICE OF U.S. FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE (OFDA)
 

Background: On October 24 the intensifying Atlantic Tropical Storm Mitch was 

upgraded to a hurricane that quickly developed into one of the strongest and most 

damaging hurricanes to ever hit the Caribbean and Central America. At its height on 

October 26 and 27, the hurricane had sustained winds of 180 mph and dumped heavy 

rains over Central America. Although the winds diminished as Hurricane Mitch traveled 

inland over Honduras on October 30, the storm continued to produce torrential rains 

which caused catastrophic floods and landslides throughout the region. Mitch dissipated 

over southeastern Mexico after its slow, destructive march north and west across 

Honduras and Guatemala, but briefly regained tropical storm strength as it moved 

northeasterly across Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula, the Gulf of Mexico and southern 

Florida. On November 5 all tropical storm warnings were discontinued as Mitch's 

remnants tracked out into the Atlantic. Prior to Mitch making landfall, USAID/OFDA prepositioned assets throughout the region along the storm's forecasted course, and 

quickly launched its emergency relief efforts as the hurricane passed overland. The 

USAID/OFDA Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) was established to 

coordinate the U.S. Government relief effort for Central America. Senior Regional 

Advisor and DART leader Paul Bell has managed the DART personnel and its 

operations in Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua 

from the USAID/OFDA Regional Office at the U.S. Embassy in San Jose, Costa Rica. 

USG Assistance: On November 5, President Clinton announced an assistance 

package of $70 million for Central America in response to Hurricane Mitch. This funding 

will provide immediate relief assistance including health and water/sanitation needs, 

food, shelter, and other emergency relief commodities as well as airlift support and 

logistics. USAID/OFDA assistance to date, described below, is part of this overall 

package, which is being closely coordinated with the U.S. Department of Defense 

(DOD). 

Honduras: Honduras suffered the brunt of Hurricane Mitch. After being stalled for more 

than two days off the country's northern coast, the storm traveled inland during October 

30 and 31. Extensive wind damage and devastating floods have been reported 

nationwide, but particularly on the northern seaboard and in the Bay Islands. As of 

November 9, the Honduran National Emergency Commission (CONEH) reported that 

330 Appendix D-22 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

6,546 persons were killed, 6,586 were missing, 1.5 million people were affected, and 

approximately 1.1 million were displaced. According to the Honduran Military 

Operations Center (COC) more than 1.6 million people were evacuated from their 

homes. The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimated 

at least 70,000 houses had been damaged and the Government of Honduras reported 

170 bridges had been damaged or destroyed. Damage to the nation's infrastructure 

isolated entire communities which made access by emergency aid workers extremely 

difficult and it hampered efforts to supply the larger cities with food, water and other 

essentials. Additionally, press reports state that nearly 70 percent of crops were 

destroyed by Hurricane Mitch. 

On October 27, the U.S. Ambassador to Honduras James F. Creagan declared a 

disaster due to the effects of Hurricane Mitch. USAID/OFDA responded immediately by 

providing a total of $125,000 to the USAID Mission in Honduras for the local purchase 

and transport of critical relief supplies, including food, simple cooking stoves, blankets, 

and medical supplies. USAID/OFDA also provided a total of $750,000 for the 

deployment of (DOD) aircraft to assist in overflight assessments, search and rescue 

operations, and delivery of relief supplies. Initially grounded by poor visibility, the 

USAID/OFDA-funded aircraft missions have been operating since November 1. 

Currently 11 UH-60 Blackhawk, 2 MH-60 Blackhawk and 4 CH-47 Chinook helicopters, 

and 2 C-27 and 2 C-130 cargo planes are distributing relief supplies from La Ceiba and 

from Soto Cano airbase. USAID/OFDA has deployed a total of 838 rolls of plastic 

sheeting, twenty 10,000-liter water bladders, 25,500 five-gallon water jugs, and 1,004 

body bags to Honduras at a total estimated cost of $434,609 including transport. The 

first airlift carrying USAID/OFDA relief supplies arrived at La Ceiba on October 31, the 

second arrived at Soto Cano airbase on November 1, the airlift arrived at Soto Cano on 

November 2, and the fourth arrived at Soto Cano on November 9. Supplemental relief 

commodities were transported by DOD on November 9 and 10. To date, USAID/OFDA 

has provided $400,000 to the USAID Mission for the local purchase of food and 

emergency supplies, and for other response activities. Additionally, USAID/OFDA has 

provided $800,000 to the USAID Mission, which will grant funding to resident PVOs in 

Honduras for the purchase and delivery of local relief supplies. USAID/OFDA has also 

purchased and airlifted plastic food storage bags from Costa Rica that will allow for the 

distribution of critical food stocks to 100,000 families in Honduras. USAID/OFDA has 

provided $2 million to USAID/Tegucigalpa to fund projects to repair the nation's water 

supply system. 

USAID/OFDA has had disaster specialists on the ground in Honduras since October 27. 

Disaster specialists from USAID, Miami-Dade County Fire Rescue Department (MiamiDade), and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) have established a presence in 

Tegucigalpa, San Pedro Sula, La Ceiba and at Soto Cano airbase. USAID/OFDA 

personnel in Honduras have assisted CONEH's Emergency Operations Center, 

conducted field assessments, coordinated aircraft and transport logistics, and 

performed other disaster relief activities. Currently there are twelve USAID/OFDA DART 

members operating in Honduras. 

Nicaragua: Mitch inflicted its greatest damage in Nicaragua through severe rains that 

caused extensive flooding and landslides. As of November 10, the Nicaraguan National 

Appendix D-22 331 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Defense System estimated that 2,055 people had died and 1,084 were missing, many 

as a result of a large mudslide that inundated ten communities situated at the base of 

the Casitas Volcano, and that 807,480 people were affected nationwide. A Nicaraguan 

transportation official reports that 71 bridges are either destroyed or heavily damaged, 

and OCHA estimated that 70% of roads were impassable immediately after the storm.

 On October 29, U.S. Ambassador to Nicaragua Lino Gutierrez declared a disaster 

due to continued flooding. USAID/OFDA has provided $125,000 for the local purchase 

and transport of critical relief supplies, including medicines, food and shelter material. 

On November 2, USAID/OFDA provided $250,000 for the deployment of two U.S. DOD 

UH-60 and one CH-47 helicopters to assist with search and rescue efforts and the 

delivery of relief supplies. Currently 5 UH-60 and 1 CH-47 helicopters are distributing 

relief supplies to 50 communities nationwide. Airlifts of USAID/OFDA relief supplies, 

consisting of 479 rolls of plastic sheeting, 10,000 polyester blankets, 4,000 wool 

blankets, three 10,000-gallon water bladders, and 10,500 five-gallon water jugs, at a 

total estimated cost of $350,137 including transport. The first airlift arrived in Managua 

on November 4 and a second on November 8.

 USAID/OFDA has operated in Nicaragua since October 29. The DART personnel 

from USAID, Miami-Dade, and DOD have conducted assessments, assisted national 

search and rescue operations, and performed other response activities. Currently eight 

USAID/OFDA DART members are posted in Nicaragua. 

Guatemala: The storm moved northwestward across Guatemala on November 1, 

causing heavy rains and severe flooding. The national emergency office (CONRED) 

took steps to evacuate 5,969 people prior to the storm's arrival. The Red Cross 

estimated that 27,000 people were still housed in shelters as of November 4. As of 

November 9, officials reported a total of 258 deaths and 120 people missing in 

Guatemala, while 723,581 people were still at risk. OCHA reported that 347 homes, 21 

bridges, and 30 roads have been severely damaged or destroyed by flood waters, and 

that nearly 900,000 people remain at risk.

 USAID/OFDA disaster relief personnel have operated in Guatemala since October 

27. They have assisted CONRED in coordinating the national relief effort, and have 

conducting damage assessments and oversight of USAID/OFDA assistance. Currently 

there are five USAID/OFDA DART members posted in Guatemala.

 On October 31, Ambassador Donald J. Planty declared a disaster for Guatemala. In 

response, USAID/OFDA provided $25,000 through the U.S. Embassy to Catholic Relief 

Services for the local purchase of food. USAID/OFDA has delivered 290 rolls of plastic 

sheeting, 3,000 polyester blankets, 7,350 five-gallon water jugs, and four 3,000-gallon 

water bladders to Guatemala, at a total estimated cost of $182,013 including transport. 

The first airlift arrived in Guatemala City on November 4, and the second on November 

9. USAID/OFDA has also provided $ 50,000 for the rental of local helicopters to deliver 

relief supplies. Six DOD UH-60 helicopters are operating in Guatemala to facilitate relief 

efforts. 

332 Appendix D-22 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

El Salvador: As of November 9, the National Emergency Committee (NEC) of El 

Salvador reported that 239 deaths and 135 people missing as a result of flash floods, 

and the Red Cross estimated that 400 people had died and 600 were missing. OCHA 

reported heavy infrastructural damage to bridges, roads, and electric and telephone 

lines in eastern and central El Salvador. Ambassador Anne W. Patterson declared a 

disaster in El Salvador on November 1. In response, USAID/OFDA provided $25,000 

for the immediate needs of flood victims. In addition, on November 5 USAID/OFDA 

airlifted 117 rolls of plastic sheeting, 5,150 polyester blankets, 6,000 five-gallon water 

jugs, and four 3,000-gallon water bladders, at a total estimated cost of $98,451 

including transport. A Miami-Dade disaster specialist was in El Salvador November 1-5 

to assist USAID/OFDA/LAC in coordinating initial relief operations. Currently one 

USAID/OFDA DART member is in San Salvador to assist in the ongoing assessment of 

relief needs and priorities. The DART in El Salvador will be augmented with another 

disaster specialist before the weekend. 

Belize: The Government of Belize established an Emergency Operations Center in 

Belize City to prepare for the storm's arrival and evacuated over 75,000 people from 

Belize City and the coastal islands to temporary shelters in Belmopan. Contrary to initial 

forecasts, the hurricane did not directly strike Belize. Nonetheless, heavy rains caused 

flooding throughout the coastal areas, particularly in Belize City. The Government of 

Belize has since granted permission for residents to return to Belize City, however 

according to the Red Cross thousands had opted to remain in emergency shelters long 

afterward. On October 29, U.S. Charge d'Affaires Joel Danies declared a disaster for 

Belize due to the impacts of Hurricane Mitch. In response, USAID/OFDA immediately 

provided $25,000 for the local purchase of food for distribution to displaced populations 

inhabiting emergency shelters. In addition, USAID/OFDA provided funding for two U.S. 

DOD Blackhawk helicopters based in Honduras to conduct overflight assessments and 

evacuations. Weather conditions during the storm's peak never permitted these aircraft 

to fly and as Hurricane Mitch turned and tracked away from Belize the helicopters were 

deployed to support emergency logistics requirements in Nicaragua. A four-person 

USAID/OFDA assessment team (comprised of a USAID/OFDA/LAC Regional Advisor 

and three Miami-Dade disaster specialists) was in Belize from October 29 to October 

31. The team assessed needs of the evacuated population and reported that food 

stocks were adequate in Belmopan, but in short supply at Belize City. The team also 

reported that sanitation and hygiene were poor in all flood-affected areas. 

Costa Rica: Heavy rains along the entire Pacific coast of Costa Rica prompted the 

National Emergency Commission to evacuate at-risk populations. The Government of 

Costa Rica (GOCR) has since granted permission for people to return to their homes 

although approximately 1,700 people remain in temporary shelters up to a week after 

the storm had passed. Four people are reported dead as a result of the storm while four 

are still missing. On October 23, the U.S. Charge d'Affaires to Costa Rica Richard L. 

Baltimore III declared a disaster due to severe flooding caused by Hurricane Mitch. 

USAID/OFDA responded by providing a total of $45,000 to the U.S. Embassy in San 

Jose. Funds were used to rent local helicopters to provide overflight assessments and 

the delivery of food, water, and medicine to affected populations. No additional 

Appendix D-22 333 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

USAID/OFDA assistance is anticipated for Costa Rica. Currently there are five 

USAID/OFDA DART personnel stationed at the DART Headquarters in San Jose to 

coordinate the disaster response in the region. 

Region: USAID/OFDA has provided $500,000 to the Pan American Health 

Organization (PAHO) to address emergency water and sanitation needs of victims of 

Hurricane Mitch. USAID/OFDA has also provided $160,000 to the U.S. Embassy in San 

Jose for the regional deployment of emergency supplies and personnel. 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Honduras: $4,509,609 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Nicaragua: $725,137 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Guatemala: $257,013 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in El Salvador: $123,451 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Costa Rica: $45,000 

USAID/OFDA Assistance in Belize: $25,000 

USAID/OFDA Assistance to the Region: $660,000 

Total USAID/OFDA Assistance for Hurricane Mitch (to date): $6,345,210 

PUBLIC DONATION INFORMATION FOR VICTIMS OF HURRICANE MITCH

 Disasters often generate an outpouring of interest and concern by the American 

people which lead to spontaneous collections of relief supplies, i.e. food, clothing, 

medical supplies etc. In the interest of effective coordination of such public response we 

encourage concerned citizens to provide monetary donations to appropriate 

organizations.

 As transportation of relief supplies is limited by capacity, infrastructure damage and 

continuing weather constraints, it is difficult to move supplies into the affected countries. 

Unsolicited commodity donations often place an unnecessary burden on relief workers 

and local governments to store, transport and distribute supplies to those affected 

populations in need. This can also detract from the provision of more urgently needed 

relief assistance. USAID/OFDA can not provide assistance for the transport of donated 

goods.

 USAID encourages the public to contact directly those private voluntary 

organizations (PVOs) who are currently working in, or with local affiliates, in Guatemala, 

Honduras, Nicaragua, Belize, Costa Rica and El Salvador to provide monetary 

donations. A list of PVOs may be obtained by contacting InterAction directly at 202-667­

8227 x 106, or via the internet at www.interaction.org. Those interested in providing 

specific relief services or supplies should contact Volunteers in Technical Assistance 

(VITA) for information and guidelines. VITA can be reached at 703-276-1914, or via the 

internet at www.vita.org. 

334 Appendix D-22 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D-23: USAID/OFDA HURRICANE MITCH FACT SHEET #22
 

Source: US Agency for International Development (USAID) 

Date: 23 Dec 1998 

Central America - Hurricane Mitch Fact Sheet # 22 

U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
 

BUREAU FOR HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE (BHR)
 

OFFICE OF U.S. FOREIGN DISASTER ASSISTANCE (OFDA)
 

Transition from Emergency Response to Reconstruction and Rehabilitation: In 

light of diminishing emergency relief requirements in Central America, USAID is 

transitioning from critical emergency relief assistance to focus on longer-term 

rehabilitation, reconstruction and development initiatives. The USAID/OFDA regional 

office in San Jose, Costa Rica will continue to monitor and support on-going relief 

activities in response to Hurricane Mitch, as appropriate. The USAID Bureau for Latin 

America and the Caribbean will implement the long-term reconstruction, rehabilitation 

and development initiatives. Specific reconstruction assessments and requirements in 

the areas of public health, economic reactivation, social infrastructure, transportation, 

housing and shelter, public services and environment are being reviewed. Possible U.S. 

and other donor inputs into the reconstruction effort are being coordinated with each 

country. 

This will be the final USAID/OFDA Fact Sheet on Hurricane Mitch. 

Background: Tropical Storm Mitch was one of the strongest and most damaging 

storms to ever hit the Caribbean and Central America. At its height on October 26 and 

27, the hurricane had sustained winds of 180 mph and dumped heavy rains over 

Central America. Prior to Mitch making landfall, USAID/OFDA pre-positioned assets 

throughout the region along the storm's forecasted course, and quickly launched its 

emergency relief efforts as the hurricane passed overland. A USAID/OFDA Disaster 

Assistance Response Team (DART) was established to coordinate the U.S. 

Government relief effort. Senior Regional Advisor and DART leader Paul Bell has 

managed the DART personnel and its operations in Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, 

Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua from the USAID/OFDA Regional Office in San 

Jose, Costa Rica. 

USG Assistance: The U.S. Government (USG) assistance package for Central 

America in response to Hurricane Mitch totals $300 million. These funds have been, or 

are to be channeled through the following offices and agencies: 

• USAID/OFDA: $30 million 

• USAID/Food for Peace (FFP): $52 million 

• Department of Defense (DOD): $150 million 

Appendix D-23 335 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

• U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA): $63 million 

• Development/Micro-credit assistance: $5 million

 USAID assistance will provide immediate disaster relief, including health and 

water/sanitation needs, food, shelter, and other emergency relief commodities. 

Summary of USAID/OFDA Funding Assistance in Response to Hurricane Mitch: 

• USAID/OFDA Assistance in Honduras: $9,895,999 

• USAID/OFDA Assistance in Nicaragua: $4,844,267 

• USAID/OFDA Assistance in Guatemala: $1,257,013 

• USAID/OFDA Assistance in El Salvador: $1,123,451 

• USAID/OFDA Assistance in Costa Rica: $45,000 

• USAID/OFDA Assistance in Belize: $25,000 

• USAID/OFDA Assistance to Region-wide Responses: $11,660,000 

• Total USAID/OFDA Assistance for Hurricane Mitch (to date): $28,850,730 

Honduras: Honduras suffered the brunt of Hurricane Mitch. After being stalled for more 

than two days off the country's northern coast, the storm traveled inland on October 30 

and 31. Extensive wind damage and devastating floods occurred nationwide, 

particularly along the northern seaboard and in the Bay Islands. As of December 1, the 

National Emergency Committee of Honduras (CONEH) reported that 5,657 persons 

were killed, 8,052 were missing, 11,762 were injured while approximately 1.9 million 

were affected. 

Disaster Assessment Summary: The destruction to the country's road network and 

coastal ports was extensive. USAID/OFDA DART estimated that more than 92 bridges 

were destroyed and 75 were damaged by the storm. The crippling of the nation's 

infrastructure isolated entire communities, made access by emergency aid workers 

extremely difficult, and hampered efforts to supply the larger cities with food, water and 

other essentials. 

Thousands of homes were also affected by high winds and flooding. The U.N. Office 

for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimated at least 70,000 houses 

had been damaged by Hurricane Mitch. The Government of Honduras estimates that 

some 2.1 million were forced to temporarily evacuate their homes in the storm's wake. 

The vast majority of those have returned, but thousands still remain in temporary 

shelters.

 Hurricane Mitch had a severe impact on food security. Initial reports estimated that 

nearly 2 million people were in immediate need of food assistance. Emergency food aid 

was most critical during the first few weeks of the disaster response, but a large 

segment of the population will continue to require food assistance for the next several 

months. USAID/FFP is providing 60,000MT of food aid, valued at $35 million, to meet 

the needs of an average of 800,000 people through August 1999.

 Hurricane Mitch had a negative impact on the agricultural sector as well. Cash crops 

336 Appendix D-23 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

were most severely affected, with the banana industry losing an estimated 90% of its 

plants. Staple crops, by comparison, sustained less damage as they are generally 

grown on higher ground. As a result, there is an ample supply of food in the local 

markets. Acute food shortages requiring emergency relief were due more to lack of 

access to markets than to lack of adequate food stocks.

 Hurricane Mitch caused serious health problems, due largely to lack of potable 

water, contamination of water sources, and the presence of stagnant pools that serve 

as breeding grounds for disease vectors. OCHA estimated that 80% of the domestic 

water distribution systems were damaged. Between November 1 and November 28 the 

Honduran Ministry of Health reported 18 confirmed cases of cholera; 1,908 cases of 

malaria; 6 cases of leptospirosis; 1,165 cases of dengue and 49 cases of hemorrhagic 

dengue. 

Immediate USAID/OFDA Response: On October 27, the U.S. Ambassador to 

Honduras James F. Creagan declared a disaster due to the impacts of Hurricane Mitch. 

On that same date, USAID/OFDA DART was established and USAID/OFDA response 

activities began. A total of fifteen disaster specialists operated in Honduras, and one 

DART member continues to visit Honduras intermittently to monitor humanitarian 

assistance needs and USAID/OFDA-funded programs. In response to DART 

assessments and recommendations, USAID/OFDA has funded the following activities in 

Honduras: 

USAID/OFDA Assistance to Honduras: 

•	 Funding to COPECO for purchase of relief supplies (food, blankets, etc.): 

$125,000 

•	 1,038 rolls of plastic sheeting; 32 10,000-liter water bladders; 25,500 five-gallon 

water jugs; and 1,004 body bags: $311,909 

•	 Airlift of relief commodities: $212,090 

•	 Funding for DoD aircraft for overflight assessments, transport of relief items, and 

search and rescue activities: $750,000 

•	 Grant to PVOs for immediate purchase and distribution of relief supplies: 

$800,000 

•	 Mission Allowances for purchase and distribution of relief supplies: $400,000 

•	 Grants to SANAA and FHIS for water system repairs: $2,000,000 

•	 Grant to CARE for disaster relief projects: $2,133,000 

•	 Grants to PVOs for transitional disaster relief projects: $3,164,000 

•	 Total USAID/OFDA Funding in Honduras (to date): $9,895,999 

Nicaragua: Mitch inflicted its greatest damage in Nicaragua through severe rains that 

caused extensive flooding and landslides. As of November 19, the Nicaraguan National 

Emergency Commission (NEC) estimated that 2,863 people had died, 884 were 

missing, and 867,752 were affected as a result of the disaster, many after a large 

mudslide inundated ten communities situated at the base of the Casitas Volcano. The 

NEC estimates that total economic losses were $400 million in housing, $605 million in 

Appendix D-23	 337 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

the transportation network, $185 million in other infrastructure and $170 million in 

agriculture. 

Disaster Assessment Summary: As of November 24, the NEC reported that 33 

bridges were destroyed and 86 were damaged. OCHA estimated that 70% of roads 

were impassable immediately after the storm, and the Government of Nicaragua (GON) 

estimated that 8,000 kilometers of roadway were damaged. During the initial phase of 

the disaster response air transport was the only means to transport emergency relief 

supplies, including both food and non-food items.

 On November 19, the GON estimated that 31,750 houses were destroyed and 

113,950 were damaged. On November 24, the NEC reported that of the 368,261 

persons were still displaced and 65,271 remained housed in 304 emergency shelters.

 Hurricane Mitch also had a severe impact on food security and the agricultural sector 

in Nicaragua. Emergency food aid needs were most critical during the first few weeks of 

the response as hundreds of thousands were temporarily displaced from their homes. 

An estimated 800,000 people needed immediate food aid. USAID/FFP is providing 

19,700MT of food aid valued at $12 million to help meet the needs of 400,000 people 

for six months.

 In addition, Mitch had a devastating impact on the agricultural sector in Nicaragua. 

The storm hit during the second, and largest, harvest season when most of the beans 

and vegetables are planted, and just before the third planting season for basic grains. 

The rains and flooding not only reduced the harvest of food crops, they also destroyed 

much of the seed stock. Floods also damaged soil and water conservation works, 

fences, seed beds, storage facilities, wells and irrigation structures. The GON estimates 

that this sector suffered $170 million in losses. 

Mitch caused serious losses to the internal health, water and sanitation infrastructures 

in Nicaragua. According to NEC, 11 health centers were destroyed and 72 were 

damaged. Further, the GON reported that 416 health posts were damaged. The loss of 

infrastructure combined with the presence of stagnate water generated favorable 

conditions for gastrointestinal and respiratory ailments, and the increase of vector-borne 

diseases. Furthermore, flood waters and sewage contaminated water sources in many 

areas, which created a lack of potable water. On November 30, PAHO continued to 

report epidemics in Nicaragua for the following diseases: cholera, leptospirosis and 

dengue. For the period of November 1 to November 28, the Nicaraguan Ministry of 

Health reported 380 suspected cases of cholera; 2,723 cases of malaria; 523 cases of 

leptospirosis; and 1,244 cases of dengue.

 Immediate USAID/OFDA Response: On October 29, U.S. Ambassador to 

Nicaragua Lino Gutierrez declared a disaster due to the catastrophic flooding. On that 

same date, USAID/OFDA DART was established and USAID/OFDA response activities 

began. A total of eleven disaster response specialists operated in Nicaragua and one 

DART member remains in-country. That member is scheduled to depart on or about 

December 19. 6 In response to DART assessments and recommendations, 

USAID/OFDA has funded the following activities in Nicaragua: 

338 Appendix D-23 
 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

USAID/OFDA Assistance to Nicaragua: 

•	 Ambassador Assistance Authority for purchase/transport of relief supplies: 

$25,000 

•	 Funding for DOD helicopters for search and rescue activities, and transport of 

emergency supplies: $250,000 

•	 279 rolls of plastic sheeting; 15,500 five-gallon water jugs; three 10,000-liter 

water bladder; 4,000 wool blankets; 10,000 polyester blankets: $229,287 

•	 Airlift of relief commodities: $189,980 

•	 USAID/Mission Allowances for local purchase and transport of relief supplies: 

$150,000 

•	 Grants to PVOs for disaster relief projects: $4,000,000 

•	 Total USAID/OFDA Funding in Nicaragua (to date): $4,844,267 

Guatemala: The storm moved north and west across Guatemala on November 1, 

causing heavy rains and severe flooding. As of November 9, officials reported a total of 

258 deaths and 120 people missing in Guatemala. 

Disaster Assessment Summary: The Guatemalan emergency response agency 

(CONRED) evacuated 5,969 people from vulnerable areas prior to the storm's arrival. 

CONRED reported that 1,797 homes were destroyed and a further 17,188 were heavily 

damaged by Hurricane Mitch. After the storm's arrival, a total of 106,954 people were 

temporarily evacuated from their homes and the Red Cross estimated that 27,000 

people were still housed in shelters as of November 4. Although people are beginning 

to return home, many still occupy the temporary housing. 

The most recent reporting from OCHA indicated that 32 bridges and 40 roads had 

been severely damaged or destroyed by Hurricane Mitch's flood waters. In the early 

days of the disaster response, air transport was the only means to transport emergency 

relief supplies, including both food and non-food items. However, by November 25, all 

major roads in Guatemala were open and the major highway linking the Atlantic and 

Pacific coasts was operable.

 On November 5, the U.S. Embassy estimated that 95% of the nation's banana crop 

was damaged, 25-60% of the corn, bean, coffee, and sugar crops were destroyed, and 

30% of the cattle herd was lost. This placed a heavy burden on those who rely on 

subsistence crops for their food. Over the next three months, about 65,000 people will 

require food assistance. USAID/FFP is providing 7,640MT of food aid valued at $5 

million to help meet this need.

 Hurricane Mitch caused serious damage and contamination to potable water sources 

and water delivery systems in many areas of Guatemala. As a result, the incidence of 

water-borne diseases increased in the wake of the disaster. Additionally, stagnate pools 

of flood water served as breeding grounds for vectors, leading to an increase in the 

incidence of vector-borne diseases. PAHO and the Guatemalan Ministry of Health 

Appendix D-23	 339 
 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

report 1,941 suspected cases of cholera and five confirmed cases of leptospirosis. In 

addition, a rise in the incidence of dengue is being reported. No hemorrhagic dengue is 

reported.

 Immediate USAID/OFDA Response: USAID/OFDA pre-positioned disaster relief 

personnel in Guatemala on October 27, and a total of five DART members operated in 

the country until December 11. On October 31, Ambassador Donald J. Planty declared 

a disaster for Guatemala, and USAID/OFDA response activities began immediately. In 

response to DART assessments and recommendations, USAID/OFDA has funded the 

following activities in Guatemala: 

USAID/OFDA Assistance to Guatemala: 

•	 Ambassador Assistance Authority for purchase/transport of food through CRS: 

$25,000 

•	 290 rolls of plastic sheeting, 7,350 five-gallon water jugs, four 3,000-gallon water 

tanks, 3,000 polyester blankets: $89,513 

•	 Airlift of relief commodities: $92,500 

• Rental of local helicopters for aerial assessments: $50,000 

• Grants to PVOs for disaster relief transition projects: $1,000,000 

• Total USAID/OFDA Assistance to Guatemala (to date): $1,257,013 

El Salvador: Hurricane Mitch struck El Salvador on the night of October 30, bringing 

with it high winds and torrential rains. Heavy rains continued through November 1 

causing floods and landslides, particularly in the country's eastern lowlands. As of 

November 13, the National Emergency Committee of El Salvador (COEN) reported 240 

deaths and 84,000 people affected. The departments of Usulatan and San Miguel were 

the areas most severely impacted. 

Disaster Assessment Summary: As of November 6, the Government of El Salvador 

estimated that 55,864 people had been displaced by Hurricane Mitch and had occupied 

107 emergency shelters. The USAID/OFDA DART estimated that 1,000 houses were 

destroyed. In addition, COEN reports that 10,372 homes were damaged. By November 

24, the DART estimated that 99 percent of those forced to evacuate during the flooding 

had returned to their homes. 

Damage to infrastructure in El Salvador was relatively slight compared to what was 

experienced in Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala. COEN reported that 10 bridges, 

1,308 km of paved road and 2,665 km of unpaved road were damaged. In the first few 

days of the response, air support was necessary to conduct reconnaissance and 

assessments of flood-affected areas. Currently, all major roads in El Salvador are open 

and relief supplies can easily be distributed by land. 

Agriculture was among the most severely affected sectors in El Salvador. Losses in 

food crops vary from 20 percent of the corn crop to 100 percent of the bean crop in 

some areas. Additionally, some 23,000 domestic farm animals were killed, primarily 

poultry. The most significant losses were suffered by small landholders. 

340	 Appendix D-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

 Mitch caused losses to the internal health, water and sanitation infrastructures in El 

Salvador. According to COEN, 15 health centers were damaged. Water service was 

also interrupted in many areas, as water systems suffered damage to their pumping 

stations and spring intakes. Furthermore, water wells were contaminated by flooding 

because well covers were not an established practice. Thus, the lack of potable water 

and sanitation are major concerns. This infrastructure damage, combined with the 

presence of stagnate flood water, have generated favorable conditions for 

gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases, and the increase in vector-borne diseases. 

Furthermore, flood waters and sewage have contaminated water sources in affected 

areas. Nevertheless, as of November 30, PAHO reported only eight cases of cholera in 

El Salvador. 

Immediate USAID/OFDA Response: Ambassador Anne W. Patterson declared a 

disaster in El Salvador on November 1. On that same date, USAID/OFDA DART was 

established and USAID/OFDA response activities began. A total of four USAID/OFDA 

DART members were posted in San Salvador, the last member departing on December 

11. In response to DART assessments and recommendations, USAID/OFDA has 

funded the following activities in El Salvador: 

USAID/OFDA Assistance to El Salvador: 

•	 Ambassador Assistance Authority for purchase/transport of relief commodities: 

$25,000 

•	 117 rolls of plastic sheeting, 6,000 five-gallon water jugs, four 3,000-gallon water 

storage tanks, 5,150 polyester blankets: $68,451 

•	 Airlift of relief commodities: $30,000 

•	 Grants to PVOs for disaster relief transition projects: $1,000,000 

•	 Total USAID/OFDA Assistance to El Salvador (to date): $1,123,451 

Region-wide Responses: In addition to assistance provided relief activities in specific 

countries affected by Hurricane Mitch, USAID/OFDA has provided significant funding to 

support various regional disaster response efforts. Funding details for regional 

responses are as follows: 

USAID/OFDA Region-wide Responses: 

•	 Grant to PAHO for health, water and sanitation activities: $2,000,000 

•	 Funding for DOD helicopters for transport of emergency supplies: $4,000,000 

•	 Funding to DOD for reconstruction activities, including the purchase of materials 

and supplies: $5,000,000 

•	 Funding to CIAT for seed multiplication in Nicaragua and Honduras: $500,000 

•	 Funding to OFDA/LAC for administrative costs and travel: $160,000 

•	 Total USAID/OFDA Assistance to Region-wide Responses (to date): 

$11,660,000 

Belize: The Government of Belize established an Emergency Operations Center to 

Appendix D-23	 341
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

prepare for the storm's arrival and evacuated over 75,000 people from Belize City and 

the coastal islands to temporary shelters in Belmopan. Contrary to initial forecasts, the 

hurricane did not directly strike Belize. Nonetheless, heavy rains caused flooding 

throughout the coastal areas, particularly in Belize City. The Government of Belize has 

since granted permission for residents to return to Belize City, however according to the 

Red Cross thousands had opted to remain in emergency shelters long afterward. 

Immediate USAID/OFDA Response: On October 29, U.S. Charge d'Affaires Joel 

Danies declared a disaster for Belize due to the impacts of Hurricane Mitch. In 

response, USAID/OFDA immediately provided $25,000 for the local purchase of food 

for distribution to displaced populations inhabiting emergency shelters. In addition, 

USAID/OFDA provided funding for two DOD Black Hawk helicopters based in Honduras 

to conduct overflight assessments and evacuations. Weather conditions during the 

storm's peak never permitted these aircraft to fly and as Hurricane Mitch turned and 

tracked away from Belize the helicopters were deployed to support emergency logistics 

requirements in Nicaragua. A four-person USAID/OFDA assessment team was in 

Belize from October 29 to October 31. The team assessed needs of the evacuated 

population and reported that food stocks were adequate in Belmopan, but in short 

supply at Belize City. The team also reported that sanitation and hygiene were poor in 

all flood-affected areas. No additional USAID/OFDA assistance is anticipated for Belize. 

Costa Rica: Heavy rains along the entire Pacific coast of Costa Rica prompted the 

National Emergency Commission to evacuate at-risk populations. Four people are 

reported dead as a result of the storm while four are still missing. 

Immediate USAID/OFDA Response: On October 23, the U.S. Charge d'Affaires to 

Costa Rica Richard L. Baltimore III declared a disaster due to severe flooding caused 

by Hurricane Mitch. USAID/OFDA responded by providing a total of $45,000 to the U.S. 

Embassy in San Jose. Funds were used to rent local helicopters to provide overflight 

assessments and the delivery of food, water, and medicine to affected populations. No 

additional USAID/OFDA assistanc is anticipated for Costa Rica. 

342 Appendix D-23 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX E-1: JTF AGUILA POLICY LETTER #4, FORCE PROTECTION
 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
 

HEADQUARTERS, JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA
 

APO AA 34023-0008
 

JTFA-C 3 January 1999 

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION 

SUBJECT: Policy Letter #4, Force Protection. 

1. Purpose. To establish policy for the implementation of minimum Protection Posture 

(FPP) levels, corresponding THREATCON measures, and periodic force protection 

inspections. 

2. Applicability. This policy applies to all military and civilian personnel assigned, 

attached, performing duties with, or under the command or administrative control of JTF 

Aguila while in the countries of El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Guatemala. 

3. Force Protection remains the number one priority for JTF- Aguila. Nothing we do is 

worth serious injury or the loss of life. 

4. Country Task Force Commanders will evaluate the current threat to U.S. forces in 

their operational area, implement the appropriate force protection measures to counter 

that threat, periodically inspect their force protection program, and advise the JTF 

headquarters of actions taken. 

5. The minimum measures that will be implemented for each FFP level are at Encl 1. 

6. Measures corresponding to THREATCON level ALPHA+ are at Encl 2. 

7. Inspections will be conducted IAW the checklist at Encl 3. 

8. All requests to implement FFP levels three through five or to increase the 

THREATCON level will be submitted to the Commander, JTF Aguila. 

9. Exceptions to this policy will be granted on a case by case basis and will be approved 

by the Commander, JTF-Aguila. Address questions to the JTF Aguila Force Protection 

Cell at 577-315.77. 

Encl VIRGIL L. PACKETT II 

as Colonel, JTF Aguila 

Commanding 

DISTRIBUTION: A 

Appendix E-1 343 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

JTFA-C
 

SUBJECT- Enclosure 2 (THREATCON ALPHA+) to Policy Letter #4, Force Protection.
 

1. PURPOSE: To describe in detail the THREATCON measures currently in effect. 

2. APPLICABILITY: This information applies to all military and civilian personnel 

assigned, attached, performing duties with, or under the command or administrative 

control of JTF Aguila while in the countries of El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Guatemala. 

3. ASSUMPTION: THREATCON Alpha+ equates to all measures listed under 

THREATCON Alpha with selected measures listed under THREATCON Bravo. 

4. GENERAL: 

a. THREATCON Alpha applies when there is general threat of possible terrorist 

activity against personnel and facilities, the nature and extent of which are unpredictable, 

and circumstances do not justify full implementation of THREATCON Bravo measures. 

The measures in this THREATCON must be capable of being maintained indefinitely. 

b. TF Commanders have primary responsibility for providing and coordinating 

overall security during THREATCON Alpha operations. 

c. TIHREATCON Alpha includes the following measures. 

(1) At regular intervals, remind all personnel to be suspicious and 

inquisitive about strangers, particularly those carrying suitcases or other containers. 

Watch for unidentified vehicles on or in the vicinity of U.S. facilities. Watch for 

abandoned parcels or suitcases and any unusual activity. 

(2) Key personnel with access to buildings and plans for area evacuations 

must be available at all times. Key personnel should be able to seal off an area 

immediately. Key personnel required to implement security plans should be on call and 

readily available. 

(3) Secure buildings, rooms and storage areas not in regular use. 

(4) Increase security spot checks of vehicles and persons entering the 

installation and areas under the jurisdiction of the U.S. command. 

(5) Coordinate with host nation security forces to limit access points for 

vehicles and personnel into U.S. areas, commensurate with a reasonable flow of traffic. 

(6) As a deterrent, apply selective measures of THREATCON Bravo either 

individually or in combination with each other. 

(7) Review all plans, orders, personnel details and logistics requirements 

related to the introduction of higher THREATCONs. 

(8) Review and implement security measures for high-risk personnel as 

appropriate. 

344 Appendix E-1 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

(9) As appropriate, consult host nation authorities on the threat and 

mutual anti-terrorism measures. 

(10) To be determined. 

d. The following measures from THREATCON Bravo have also been 

implemented. 

(1) As appropriate, consult host nation authorities on the threat and 

mutual anti-terrorism measures. 

(2) Conduct continuous coordination/liaison with the U.S. Embassy, U.S. 

Military Group (MILGP), the host nation military and U.S. Southern Command 

Intelligence/Security elements. 

(3) Advise CJTF-Aguila daily of the threats to all forces assigned or 

attached to JTF-Aguila. 

(4) Brief all personnel on the Rules of Engagement in use in the JOA. 

(5) 24 hour host nation access control. 

JTFA-C
 

SUBJECT: Enclosure 3 (Checklist) to Policy Letter #4, Force Protection.
 

FORCE PROTECTION INSPECTION CHECKLIST 

Force Protection Planning	 Yes No N/A 

1. Are the following references on hand? 

a. DOD Directive 2000.12, Combatting Terrorism Program, 15 Sep 96. 

b. Joint Pub, 3-07.2, JTTP for Antiterrorism, 25 Jun 93. 

c. Joint Pub 3-10. 1, JTTP for Base Defense, 15 Mar 93. 

d. JTF Aguila Policy Letter #2, Vehicle Movement outside the Designated 

Compound of Comalapa Air Ease, El Salvador, 18 Dec 98. 

e. JTF Aguila Policy Letter #3, SOP for Storage of Weapons and Ammunition, 

23 Dec 98. 

f. TF Policy Letter #4, Force Protection, 5 Jan 1999. 

g. JTF Aguila Memorandum, Force Protection Intelligence and incidents 

Reporting, 26 Dec 98. 

h. JTF Aguila Memorandum, Off Limits Areas on Comalapa Air Base, 5 Jan 99. 

i. JTF Aguila Force Protection Plan, 12 Dec 98 

j. OPORD 6150-98, Operation Fuerzas Apoyando 

2. Does the organization have a force protection plan? 

3. Does the force protection plan include the following 

a. Personal security measures. 

b. Convoy security measures. 

Appendix E-1	 345 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

c. Force protection posture matrix. 

d. Incident reporting procedures. 

e. Rules of engagement. 

4. Have the following contingencies been planned for? 

a. QRF procedures. 

b. Vehicle accident procedures. 

c. MEDEVAC procedures (ground and air). 

d. Mass casualty procedures. 

e. Death of a servicemember. 

f. Downed aircraft procedures. 

g. UXO procedures. 

h. Bomb threat / mail bomb procedures. 

i. Notifications roster. 

5. Is there a Force Protection Officer appointed on orders? 

6. Has the organization estabIished a weekly Force Protection Working Group? 

7. Does the organization have a Crisis Action Team? 

8. Does it have proper staff representation and has it met within the last 90 days? 

9. Have force protection measures been coordinated with the host nation military and the 

U.S. MILGRP? 

10. Is there a mutual understanding with the host nation military regarding authority, 

jurisdiction, and possible interaction in the event of a crisis? 

11. Has training been conducted on force protection contingencies? 

12. Has a prioritized list of Mission Essential Vulnerable Areas (MEVAs) been 

established? 

13. Is there a plan of action and have milestones been established for addressing 

vulnerable areas? 

Force Protection Operations and Procedures 

14. Do all members of the organization receive periodic force protection briefings? 

15. Are procedures in place to limit access to the installation? 

16. Does the organization provide threat information briefings to all personnel leaving the 

installation? 

17. Has an off limits policy been established? 

18. Are all personnel required to sign out and sign in when leaving and returning to the 

installation? 

346 Appendix E-1 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

19. Are authorizations required for servicemembers leaving the installation? 

20. Is the two vehicle rule being adhered to? 

21. Are all servicemembers required to be in uniform when off the installation? 

22. Are all personnel returning to the installation before the hours of darkness? 

23. Are armed host nation escorts accompanying every convoy? 

24. Is the organization adhering to the commander's guidance on the storage 

of AA&E? 

25. Are all measures in effect for the current THREATCON? 

26. Does the organization have the resources to implement the next higher 

FPP level? 

27. Are all measures in effect for the current Force Protection Posture (FPP)? 

28. Does the organization have the resources to implement the next higher 

FPP level? 

Threat Information Collection, Dissemination, and Reporting 

29. Is there documentation showing that all servicemembers received a threat 

awareness briefing? 

30. Do procedures exist to allow for the timely reporting and dissemination of threat 

information both during and after duty hours? 

31. Has the collection, dissemination, and reporting of terrorist information been 

reviewed by the Commander in the last year? 

32. Is the threat assessment current? 

33. Does the organization receive recurring threat updates? 

34. Are efforts in place to collect all available information? 

35. Are written intelligence summaries being submitted at 1400 daily to the JTF-A/J2? 

Additional Comments: 

Appendix E-1 347 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX E-2: US SOUTHCOM HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY AND 

PROCEDURES 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

UNITED STATES SOUTHERN COMMAND 

3511 NW 91ST AVENUE 

MIAMI, FL 33172-1217 

REPLY TO THE ATTN OF 

Administration 

∗

SC Regulation 1-20 1 July 1998 

Effective Upon Receipt 

HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY AND PROCEDURES 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Paragraph Page 

Purpose................................................................ 1 1 

Objectives............................................................ 2 1 

Scope.................................................................. 3 2 

General................................................................ 4 2 

Policies and Procedures............................................. 5 2 

Responsibilities...................................................... 6 4 

Appendix 

A. Human Rights Instruments and Authority........................................... A-1 

B. Universal Declaration of Human Rights.............................................. B-1 

C. OAS Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man.................................. C-1 

D. Human Rights Program of Instruction Objectives................................... D-1 

Annex A – Human Rights Discussion Outline............................................. D-3 (A1) 

E. Human Rights Standing Orders, SC Form 165...................................... E-1 

1. PURPOSE. This regulation establishes United States Southern Command 

(USSOUTHCOM) Human Rights policies and procedures for all U.S. Department of 

Defense (military or civilian) personnel permanently or temporarily assigned to the 

USSOUTHCOM area of responsibility (AOR). It also assigns responsibilities to 

Component Commanders, Military Group (MILGRP) Commanders or U.S. Defense 

Representatives in allied nations, and the USSOUTHCOM Staff. 

∗

 This regulation supersedes USSOUTHCOM Policy Memo, dated 28 August 1996 

348 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

2. OBJECTIVES. In accordance with international and domestic law, as well as U.S. 

policy, USSOUTHCOM human rights objectives are to: 

a. Establish a USSOUTHCOM human rights policy for the AOR, consistent with 

U.S. law and policy and with international norms of human rights. 

b. Encourage and assist the armed and/or security forces of allied governments to 

adhere to international norms of human rights. 

c. Ensure that USSOUTHCOM maximizes engagement opportunities to foster 

greater respect and understanding of human rights. 

d. Ensure that all U.S. DoD personnel assigned to USSOUTHCOM or deployed into 

the AOR understand their responsibility to respect and protect human rights, to include 

the reporting of all suspected gross violations of internationally recognized human rights. 

3. SCOPE. This regulation applies to all U.S. DoD personnel assigned to 

USSOUTHCOM or deployed into the USSOUTHCOM AOR. 

4. GENERAL. 

a. DEFINITION OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Internationally recognized human rights, as 

defined in international treaty and customary international law, are absolutely legally 

binding on all States and include certain fundamental protections for the individual. A 

State that engages in the following activities commits a gross violation of internationally 

recognized human rights: genocide; slavery or slave trade; the murder of, or causing the 

disappearance of, individuals; torture, or other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment 

or punishment; prolonged arbitrary detention; systematic racial discrimination; or a 

consistent pattern of committing gross violations of internationally recognized human 

rights. Broader types of human rights also include political and civil rights essential to a 

democratic society such as the right to free expression, the right to peaceful assembly, 

the right to free and fair elections, the right to a fair trial, freedom of religion, freedom of 

the press, as well as the right to an independent judiciary and a government subject to 

the rule of law. 

b. U.S. HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY. The U.S. human rights policy strives to protect 

the dignity and integrity of individuals and promote democratic processes. U.S. statutes 

require the U.S. Government to consider the human rights performance of foreign states 

as a vital aspect of our political and commercial relations. These statutes generally 

prohibit or limit assistance to any country that engages in a consistent pattern of 

internationally recognized human rights violations. 

c. INTERNATIONAL NORMS. The U.S. views the Restatement Third of the 

Foreign Relations Law of the United States (1987); Customary International Law of 

Human Rights as the standards against which a nation’s human rights performance is 

measured. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Appendix B) and the 

Organization of American States Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man (Appendix 

C) also contain important human rights standards. 

Appendix E-2 349 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

5. POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. USSOUTHCOM human rights policies and 

procedures advance the respect for internationally recognized human rights in the AOR. 

This is accomplished through awareness education, integration of human rights issues 

into operations, and human rights advising and reporting: 

a. AWARENESS EDUCATION. 

(1) The U.S. Southern Command Human Rights Program of Instruction (POI), 

(Appendix D), provides detailed guidance concerning internationally recognized human 

rights awareness education objectives and standards. 

(2) All U.S. DoD personnel assigned to USSOUTHCOM or deployed into the 

AOR will receive human rights awareness education and will be issued a 

USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Standing Orders card, SC Form 165 (sample at 

Appendix E). 

(3) Human rights awareness education for temporary duty U.S. DoD personnel 

will be conducted in CONUS as part of pre-deployment preparations. 

(4) MILGRP Commanders or U.S. Defense Representatives will conduct 

awareness education for personnel assigned to their unit or team. 

b. INTEGRATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS INTO OPERATIONS. 

(1) Exercises: All appropriate USSOUTHCOM sponsored exercises (e.g., peacekeeping operations, counterdrug, disaster relief, etc.) will incorporate human rights 

issues and concerns into the exercise Master Scenario Events List (MSEL) and will 

contain specific events that expose participants to human rights situations. 

(2) Deployments: Officers and noncommissioned officers in charge of U.S. 

military personnel deployed to the AOR will include human rights awareness as part of 

all training provided to allied military forces. All human rights issues and observations 

will be addressed during initial briefings, periodic training reviews, and after action 

reports (AARs). 

c. HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISING AND REPORTING. 

(1) SCJ5-HR will monitor all human rights developments in the AOR and make 

reports to CINCSO when appropriate. 

(2) U.S. DoD personnel will immediately report all instances of suspected gross 

violations of internationally recognized human rights through the chain of command to 

the country’s MILGRP Commander. The MILGRP Commander will forward information 

regarding an alleged violation to the U.S. Ambassador and to CINCSO. Allegations of 

gross violations of internationally recognized human rights will be investigated in 

coordination with the U.S. Ambassador. 

(3) MILGRP Commanders will report to CINCSO positive human rights 

developments, such as the introduction/improvement of human rights programs, within 

the host nation armed forces. 

350 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

d. PROMOTION. SCJ5 will represent USSOUTHCOM at human rights hemispheric 

and regional conferences, seminars and working groups in order to forward the 

objectives described in para. 2 of this regulation. 

6. RESPONSIBILITIES. 

a. COMPONENT COMMANDERS. Component Commanders will conduct human 

rights awareness education for all U.S. DoD personnel permanently or temporarily 

assigned and for subordinate component units prior to deployment into the 

USSOUTHCOM AOR. This awareness training will be in accordance with the objectives 

established in the Human Rights Awareness Education POI (Appendix D) and 

supplemented with any appropriate information concerning local human rights policies 

and issues. 

b. MILGRP COMMANDERS OR U.S. DEFENSE REPRESENTATIVES: 

(1) Immediately report all suspected gross violations of internationally recognized 

human rights to the Ambassador and CINCSO and maintain a record of all such reports. 

All suspected incidents will be reported, regardless of the identity of the perpetrator or 

the victim, and regardless of whether they are military or civilian. 

(2) Assess allied military human rights training programs and recommend any 

appropriate improvements to those programs. Provide copies of these assessments and 

recommendations to USSOUTHCOM, Human Rights Division, SCJ5-HR. 

(3) Provide a quarterly report to USSOUTHCOM, Human Rights Division, SCJ5­

HR, on human rights awareness education conducted during exercises and by training 

teams. 

(4) Report to CINCSO positive human rights developments, such as the 

introduction/improvement of human rights programs, within the host nation armed forces. 

c. USSOUTHCOM STAFF: 

(1) SCJ3: 

(a) Ensure that deployment orders and instructions for U.S. DoD personnel 

deployed into the AOR include the requirement to conduct pre-deployment human rights 

awareness education and to immediately report suspected gross violations of 

internationally recognized human rights per paragraph 5.c.(2) of this regulation. 

(b) Review exercise and deployment AARs to determine the impact of the 

human rights awareness education received by deploying personnel and impact of 

human rights training presented to allied personnel. Ensure any allegations of gross 

violations of internationally recognized human rights contained in AARs are reported to 

the U.S. Ambassador in country and to CINCSO. 

(2) SCJ5: 

Appendix E-2 351 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(a) Work with SCJ3 to ensure human rights issues and concerns are 

integrated into all appropriate USSOUTHCOM exercises and training. 

(b) Assist country teams to develop human rights programs in host nation 

armed/security forces. 

(c) Review and maintain records and reports, including non-U.S. Government 

reports, concerning AOR nations’ human rights performance. Report significant findings 

and recommendations to CINCSO. 

(d) Submit results and findings of human rights incidents reported by U.S. 

DoD personnel per this regulation to CINCSO. 

(e) Manage the USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Awareness Education 

Program as described in paragraph 5.a. of this regulation. 

(3) SCJA: 

(a) Review all reports of alleged violations of internationally recognized 

human rights. 

(b) Assist SCJ5-HR to ensure host nation military legal advisors promote 

human rights issues. 

The proponent agency of this regulation is the U.S. Southern Command. Users are 

invited to send comments and suggested improvements directly to HQ USSOUTHCOM, 

SCJ5-HR, 3511 NW 91st Avenue, Miami, FL 33172-1217. 

SCJ5 

FOR THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF: 

OFFICIAL: 

J. F. GOODMAN 

BGen, USMC 

Chief of Staff 

KATHLEEN I. RHODES 

Colonel, USAF 

Adjutant General 

DISTRIBUTION: 

D 

352 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX A
 

HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS AND AUTHORITY
 

1. INTERNATIONAL SOURCES 

a. Restatement Third of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States (1987); 

Customary International Law of Human Rights 

b. Charter of the Organization of American States and American Declaration of the 

Rights and Duties of Man, dated 1965. 

c. United Nations Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. 

d. Geneva Conventions of 1949: Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War; 

Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. 

e. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of December 16, 1966. 

f. International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights of 16 December 

1966. 

g. Convention to Suppress the Slave Trade and Slavery of 25 September 1926, as 

amended by the Protocol of 7 December 1953. 

h. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 9 

December 1948. 

i. Convention on the Political Rights of Women of 31 March 1953. 

j. Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and 

Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery of 7 September 1956. 

k. Convention Concerning the Abolition of Forced Labor of 25 June 1957. 

l. Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees of 31 January 1967. 

2. NATIONAL SOURCES 

a. Constitution of the United States and other Nations. 

b. United States Bill of Rights. 

c. United States Declaration of Independence. 

Appendix E-2 353 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Appendix A (Continued) 

3. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SOURCES 

a. Uniform Code of Military Justice. 

b. Department of Defense Directive 5100.77, the DoD Law of War Program, 1979. 

c. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3121.01, Standing Rules of 

Engagement, 1994. 

d. Department of the Air Force, Pamphlet 110-31, International Law--The Conduct 

of Armed Conflict and Air Operations, 1976. 

e. Department of the Army, Field Manual 27-10, Law of Land Warfare, 1956, with 

Change 1 1976. 

f. Department of the Navy, Navel Warfare Publication 9 (Rev A), Fleet Marine 

Force Manual 1-10, The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, 

1989. 

354 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

____________ 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX B 

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS 

Adopted and Proclaimed by General Assembly Resolution 217 A (III) of 10
 

December 19481

 Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of 

all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the 

world,

 Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts 

which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which 

human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want 

has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, 

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, 

to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by 

the rule of law, 

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between 

nations, 

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in 

fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal 

rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better 

standards of life in larger freedom, 

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the 

United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for an observance of human rights 

and fundamental freedoms, 

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest 

importance for the full realization of this pledge, 

Now, therefore, 

The General Assembly 

Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of 

achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every 

organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and 

education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive 

measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition 

and observance, both among the peoples of Members States themselves and among 

the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. 

1

 Voting 48 for, including United States; 0 against; 8 abstentions (Eastern bloc, Saudi 

Arabia, and South Africa). 

Article 1

 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with 

reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. 

Appendix E-2 355 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Article 2

 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without 

distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other 

opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

 Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or 

international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be 

independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. 

Article 3

 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. 

Article 4

 No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be 

prohibited in all their forms. 

Article 5

 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or 

punishment. 

Article 6

 Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. 

Article 7

 All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal 

protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protections against any discrimination in 

violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination. 

Article 8

 Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunal for 

acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law. 

Article 9

 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile 

Article 10

 Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and 

impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal 

charge against him. 

Article 11
 

356 Appendix E-2
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

1. Everyone charged with a penal offense has the right to be presumed innocent until 

proven guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees 

necessary for his defense.

 2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offense on account of any act or omission 

which did not constitute a penal offense, under national or international law, at the time 

when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was 

applicable at the time the penal offense was committed. 

Article 12

 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home, or 

correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to 

the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. 

Article 13

 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of 

each State.

 2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his 

country. 

Article 14

 1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from 

persecution.

 2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from 

non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United 

Nations. 

Article 15

 1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.

 2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change 

his nationality. 

Article 16

 1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or 

religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights 

as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

 2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending 

spouses.

 3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to 

protection by society and the State. 

Article 17

 1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

 2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. 

Article 18 

Appendix E-2 357
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right 

includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in 

community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in 

teaching, practice, worship and observance. 

Article 19

 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes 

freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart 

information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. 

Article 20

 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

 2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association. 

Article 21

 1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or 

through freely chosen representatives.

 2. Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

 3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will 

shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and 

equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures. 

Article 22

 Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to 

realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with 

the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights 

indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality. 

Article 23

 1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable 

conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

 2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

 3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for 

himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if 

necessary, by others means of social protection.

 4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his 

interests. 

Article 24

 Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working 

hours and periodic holidays with pay. 

Article 25 

358 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and wellbeing of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and 

necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, 

sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances 

beyond his control.

 2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, 

whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection. 

Article 26

 1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the 

elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. 

Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher 

education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

 2. Education shall be directed to the full development of human personality and to the 

strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote 

understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, 

and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

 3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their 

children. 

Article 27

 1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to 

enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

 2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting 

from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author. 

Article 28

 Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and 

freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized. 

Article 29

 1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development 

of his personality is possible.

 2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such 

limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition 

and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of 

morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

 3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes 

and principles of the United Nations. 

Article 30

 Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or 

person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction 

of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein. 

Appendix E-2 359
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX C 

American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man 

O.A.S. Res. XXX, adopted by the Ninth International Conference of
 

American States, Bogota, 1948, OEA/Ser. L./V/I.4 Rev. (1965)
 

Whereas: 

The American peoples have acknowledged the dignity of the individual, and their 

national constitutions recognize that juridical and political institutions, which regulate like 

in human society, have as their principal aim the protection of the essential rights of man 

and the creation of circumstances that will permit him to achieve spiritual and material 

progress and attain happiness; 

The American states have on repeated occasions recognized that the essential rights 

of man are not derived from the fact that he is a national of a certain state, but are based 

upon attributes of his human personality; 

The international protection of the rights of man should be the principal guide of an 

evolving American law; 

The affirmation of essential human rights by the American states together with the 

guarantees given by the internal regimes of the states establish the initial system of 

protection considered by the American states as being suited to the present social and 

juridical conditions, not without a recognition on their part that they should increasingly 

strengthen that system in the international field as conditions become more favorable, 

The Ninth International Conference of American States

 Agrees

 To adopt the following 

AMERICAN DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF MAN

 PREAMBLE

 All men are born free and equal, in dignity and in rights, and, being endowed by nature 

with reason and conscience, they should conduct themselves as brothers one to 

another. 

The fulfillment of duty by each individual is a prerequisite to the rights of all. Rights 

and duties are interrelated in every social and political activity of man. While rights exalt 

individual liberty, duties express the dignity of that liberty.

 Duties of a juridical nature presuppose others of a moral nature which support them in 

principle and constitute their basis.

 Inasmuch as spiritual development is the supreme end of human existence and the 

highest expression thereof, it is the duty of man to serve that end with all his strength 

and resources.

 Since culture is the highest social and historical expression of that spiritual 

development, it is the duty of man to preserve, practice and foster culture by every 

means within his power.

 And, since moral conduct constitutes the noblest flowering of culture, it is the duty of 

every man always to hold it in high respect. 

CHAPTER ONE 

360 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

 Rights 

Article I. Right to Life, Liberty and Personal Security. Every human being has the right 

to life, liberty and the security of his person. 

Article II. Right to Equality before the Law. All persons are equal before the law and 

have the rights and duties established in this Declaration, without distinction as to race, 

sex, language, creed or any other factor. 

Article III. Right to Religious Freedom and Worship. Every person has the right freely 

to profess a religious faith, and to manifest and practice it both in public and in private. 

Article IV. Right to Freedom of Investigation, Opinion, Expression and Dissemination. 

Every person has the right to freedom of investigation, of opinion, and of the expression 

and dissemination of ideas, by any medium whatsoever. 

Article V. Right to Protection of Honor, Personal Reputation and Private and Family 

Life. Every person has the right to the protection of the law against abusive attacks 

upon his honor, his reputation, and his private and family life. 

Article VI. Every person has the right to establish a family, the basic element of 

society, and to receive protection therefor. 

Article VII. Right to Protection for Mothers and Children. All women, during pregnancy 

and the nursing period, and all children have the right to special protection, care and aid. 

Article VIII. Right to Residence and Movement. Every person has the right to fix his 

residence within the territory of the state of which he is a national, to move about freely 

within such territory, and not to leave it except by his own will. 

Article IX. Right to Inviolability of the Home. Every person has the right to the 

inviolability of his home. 

Article X. Right to the Inviolability and Transmission of Correspondence. Every 

person has the right to the inviolability and transmission of his correspondence. 

Article XI. Right to the Preservation of Health and to Well-being. Every person has 

the right to the preservation of his health through sanitary and social measures relating 

to food, clothing, housing and medical care, to the extent permitted by public and 

community resources. 

Article XII. Right to Education. Every person has the right to an education, which 

should be based on the principles of liberty, morality and human solidarity.

 Likewise every person has the right to an education that will prepare him to attain a 

decent life, to raise his standard of living, and to be a useful member of society. 

The right to an education includes the right to equality of opportunity in every case, in 

accordance with natural talents, merit and the desire to utilize the resources that the 

state or the community is in a position to provide.

 Every person has the right to receive, free, at least a primary education. 

Appendix E-2 361
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Article XIII. Right to the Benefits of Culture. Every person has the right to take part in 

the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts, and to participate in the benefits that 

result from intellectual progress, especially scientific discoveries.

 He likewise has the right to the protection of his moral and material interests as 

regards his inventions or any literary, scientific or artistic works of which he is the author. 

Article XIV. Right to Work and to Fair Remuneration. Every person has the right to 

work, under proper conditions, and to follow his vocation freely, insofar as existing 

conditions of employment permit.

 Every person who works has the right to receive such remuneration as will, in 

proportion to his capacity and skill, assure him a standard of living suitable for himself 

and for his family. 

Article XV. Right to Leisure Time and to the Use thereof. Every person has the right 

to leisure time, to wholesome recreation, and to the opportunity for advantageous use of 

his free time to his spiritual, cultural and physical benefit. 

Article XVI. Right to Social Security. Every person has the right to social security 

which will protect him from the consequences of unemployment, old age, and disabilities 

arising from causes beyond his control that make it physically or mentally impossible for 

him to earn a living. 

Article XVII. Right to Recognition of Juridical Personality and of Civil Rights. Every 

person has the right to be recognized everywhere as a person having rights and 

obligations, and to enjoy the basic civil rights. 

Article XVIII. Right to a Fair Trial. Every person may resort to the courts to ensure 

respect for his legal rights. There should likewise be available to him a simple, brief 

procedure whereby the courts will protect him from acts of authority that, to his prejudice, 

violate any fundamental constitutional rights. 

Article XIX. Right to Nationality. Every person has the right to the nationality to which 

he is entitled by law and to change it, if he so wishes, for the nationality of any other 

country that is willing to grant it to him. 

Article XX. Right to Vote and to Participate in Government. Every person having legal 

capacity is entitled to participate in the government of his country, directly or through his 

representatives, and to take part in popular elections, which shall be by secret ballot, 

and shall be honest, periodic and free. 

Article XXI. Right of Assembly. Every person has the right to assemble peaceably 

with others in a formal public meeting or an informal gathering, in connection with 

matters of common interest of any nature. 

362 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Article XXII. Right of Association. Every person has the right to associate with others 

to promote, exercise and protect his legitimate interests of a political, economic, 

religious, social, cultural, professional, labor union or other nature. 

Article XXIII. Right to Property. Every person has a right to own such private property 

as meets the essential needs of decent living and helps to maintain the dignity of the 

individual and of the home. 

Article XXIV. Right of Petition. Every person has the right to submit respectful 

petitions to any competent authority, for reasons of either general or private interest, and 

the right to obtain a prompt decision thereon. 

Article XXV. Right of Protection from Arbitrary Arrest. No person may be deprived of 

his liberty except in the cases and according to the procedures established by preexisting law.

 No person may be deprived of liberty for nonfulfillment of obligations of a purely civil 

character.

 Every individual who has been deprived of his liberty has the right to have the legality 

of his detention ascertained without delay by a court, and the right to be tried without 

undue delay or, otherwise, to be released. He also has the right to humane treatment 

during the time he is in custody. 

Article XXVI. Right to Due Process of Law. Every accused person is presumed to be 

innocent until proved guilty.

 Every person accused of an offense has the right to be given an impartial and public 

hearing, and to be tried by courts previously established in accordance with preexisting 

laws, and not to receive cruel, infamous or unusual punishment. 

Article XXVII. Right to Asylum. Every person has the right, in case of pursuit not 

resulting from ordinary crimes, to seek and receive asylum in foreign territory, in 

accordance with the laws of each country and with international agreements. 

Article XXVIII. Scope of the Rights of Man. The rights of man are limited by the rights 

of others, by the security of all, and by the just demands of the general welfare and the 

advancement of democracy. 

CHAPTER TWO 

Duties 

Article XXIX. Duties to Society. It is the duty of the individual so to conduct himself in 

relation to others that each and every one man fully form and develop his personality. 

Article XXX. Duties Toward Children and Parents. It is the duty of every person to aid, 

support, educate and protect his minor children, and it is the duty of children to honor 

their parents always and to aid, support and protect them when they need it. 

Article XXXI. Duties to Receive Instruction. It is the duty of every person to acquire at 

least an elementary education. 

Appendix E-2 363 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Article XXXII. Duty to Vote. It is the duty of every person to vote in the popular 

elections of the country of which he is a national, when he is legally capable of doing so. 

Article XXXIII. Duty to Obey the Law. It is the duty of every person to obey the law 

and other legitimate commands of the authorities of his country and those of the country 

in which he may be. 

Article XXXIV. Duty to Serve the Community and the Nation. It is the duty of every 

able-bodied person to render whatever civil and military service his country may require 

for its defense and preservation, and, in case of public disaster, to render such services 

as many be in his power. It is likewise his duty to hold any public office to which he may 

be elected by popular vote in the state of which he is a national. 

Article XXXV. Duties with Respect to Social Security and Welfare. It is the duty of 

every person to cooperate with the state and the community with respect to social 

security and welfare, in accordance with his ability and with existing circumstances. 

Article XXXVI. Duty to Pay Taxes. It is the duty of every person to pay the taxes 

established by law for the support of public services. 

Article XXXVII. Duty to Work. It is the duty of every person to work, as far as his 

capacity and possibilities permit, in order to obtain the means of livelihood or to benefit 

his community. 

Article XXXVIII. Duty to Refrain from Political Activities in a Foreign Country. It is the 

duty of every person to refrain from taking part in political activities that, according to 

law, are reserved exclusively to the citizens of the state in which he is an alien. 

364 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX D 

USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Program of Instruction Objectives 

1. REFERENCE. See Appendix A (Human Rights Instruments and Authority). 

2. PURPOSE. This Program of Instruction (POI) prescribes the human rights 

awareness education program objectives and standards for all U.S. Department of 

Defense (DoD) personnel (military and civilian) assigned or performing temporary duty in 

the USSOUTHCOM Area of Responsibility (AOR). It supplements the guidance 

contained in paragraph 5 of this regulation and any existing Component programs. 

3. OBJECTIVES. USSOUTHCOM human rights training program objectives will: 

a. Develop human rights awareness in U.S. DoD personnel operating within the 

AOR and in Allied Nation forces with whom SOUTHCOM units train. 

b. Effectively disseminate USSOUTHCOM’s human rights policy and objectives. 

c. Ensure U.S. DoD personnel understand the requirement to report suspected 

gross violations of internationally recognized human rights by U.S. and/or allied nation 

forces operating within the AOR. 

4. TRAINING STANDARDS. 

a. HUMAN RIGHTS AWARENESS EDUCATION. All U.S. DoD personnel assigned 

or performing temporary duty in the AOR will receive initial human rights awareness 

education. Such education will include, at a minimum, viewing the human rights video, 

reading the current Human Rights Policy Regulation (including all appendices), and 

receiving a USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Standing Orders card, SC Form 165. For 

deploying units, this education will be conducted within the six months of assignment to 

the AOR. 

b. HUMAN RIGHTS AWARENESS. Human rights awareness will be included in all 

training provided to allied nation forces. Human rights awareness should be realistically 

incorporated into all individual and unit training, specialized training, and exercises. 

5. TRAINING MATERIALS. The Human Rights Discussion Outline (Annex A) provides 

an overview of the areas that should be addressed during Human Rights Awareness 

Education. In addition, this USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Policy Regulation, the 

USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Standing Orders card, and the training video1

 provide 

the basic information necessary to conduct awareness education. A listing of important 

Human Rights Instruments and Authority is at Appendix A and is recommended for 

further discussion. 

6. TRAINING REPORTS. 

1

 Training video can be obtained from the USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Division, SCJ5-HR, at 

DSN: 567-XXXX or Commercial (305)437-XXXX, voice extensions: 1572/1573/1560, fax: 

1857. 

Appendix E-2 365 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

a. Individuals or units deploying to the AOR must certify compliance with the initial 

training requirement before receiving theater clearance. 

b. Human rights awareness training to host nation personnel will be addressed in 

periodic training reviews and after action reports. 

366 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

1 July 1998 SC Reg 1-20 

APPENDIX D (CONTINUED) 

ANNEX A - HUMAN RIGHTS DISCUSSION OUTLINE 

1. REFERENCE: See Appendix A. 

2. PURPOSE: This outline is provided to assist in conducting Human Rights 

Awareness Education for a deploying unit and/or as required reading for an individual 

doing self-study to meet the requirement of this regulation. It supplements the guidance 

contained in the Human Right Policy Regulation. This outline provides a synopsis of 

important areas which should be discussed as part of Human Rights Awareness 

Education. 

3. BACKGROUND: 

a. There is no single human rights document that sets forth all internationally 

recognized human rights. However, under international treaty and customary law the 

following activities constitute a gross violation of internationally recognized human rights: 

(1) Genocide 

(2) Slavery or slave trade 

(3) The murder of, or causing the disappearance of, individuals 

(4) Torture or other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment 

(5) Prolonged arbitrary detention 

(6) Systematic racial discrimination 

(7) A consistent pattern of committing gross violations of internationally 

recognized human rights. 

b. DoD civilians and US military represent not only their specific service and 

command, but also the United States of America. Therefore, all personnel must ensure 

that internationally recognized human rights are not violated. 

c. Human rights norms are violated when a government, or officials of a 

government, violate these internationally recognized human rights. 

4. DEFINITION OF HUMAN RIGHTS: 

a. Internationally recognized human rights, as defined in international treaty and 

customary international law, are absolutely legally binding on all States and include 

certain fundamental protections for the individual. A State that engages in the activities 

mentioned in paragraph 3.a. above commits a gross violation of internationally 

recognized human rights. 

b. In addition to internationally recognized human right listed in 3.a., other 

fundamental political and civil freedoms include, but are not limited to, the following: 

(1) Freedom of religion. 

(2) Freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. 

(3) Freedom from unnecessary destruction of property. 

Appendix E-2 367 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(4) Right to a fair and public trial. 

(5) Freedom from severe and degrading physical mistreatment. 

(6) Freedom to participate in government. 

c. The “American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man” (Appendix B) and 

the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (Appendix C) provide a detailed discussion 

of a wide variety of human rights and freedoms. They include internationally recognized 

human rights as well as the broader political and civil human rights. 

5. HUMAN RIGHTS DECALOGUE 

a. First, Honor the Spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

(1) Do What is Right. 

(2) Focus: Protection of Individual Integrity. 

(3) No Cruel Punishment. 

(4) Due Process. 

(5) Protection of one’s home, family, and personal security. 

(6) When governments respect and protect the rights of people, governments 

maintain legitimacy. In this way, respect for government is achieved. 

b. Second, Give and Obey Lawful Orders. 

(1) Directing subordinates to commit violations of internationally recognized 

human rights will subject the superior officer to punishment for the offense(s). 

(2) Following orders is not a valid defense to acts which clearly violate 

internationally recognized human rights norms—the subordinate is subject to 

punishment for the offense(s). 

(3) If you think an order is unlawful, ask for clarification. 

(4) U.S. DoD personnel have the obligation to uphold the rule of law over clearly 

illegal commands. 

c. Third, Report Crimes and Suspected Violations of Internationally Recognized 

Human Rights Violations to Proper Authorities. 

(1) Report suspected violations to your Commander, Chaplain, Judge Advocate, 

U.S. Embassy officials or other responsible authority. 

(2) You have the duty to prevent violations of internationally recognized human 

rights, by: 

(a) Using moral arguments 

(b) Threatening to report the act 

(c) Asking the superior to clarify the order 

368 Appendix E-2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

(d) Stating your personal disagreement 

(e) Asking others to help intervene. 

d. Fourth, Respect Individual Integrity and Human Dignity. 

(1) Individual integrity includes freedom of thought, conscience and religion; 

freedom of expression, communication and information; and freedom of assembly and 

association. 

(2) Human dignity includes the protection of those not in a position to protect 

themselves, thus deserving special care and attention: Pregnant women, children, the 

sick, the aged, the homeless, and others. 

(3) As protectors of society, the military must earn the respect of those we serve. 

e. Fifth, Abide by the Military Code of Honor and Always Tell the Whole Truth. 

(1) Fully cooperate with any investigation into suspected violations of 

internationally recognized human rights. 

(2) Tell the whole truth -- set the example for others to follow. 

f. Sixth, Spread the Word: Order Depends on Respect for Human Rights. 

(1) The government must protect the governed. If it fails, it loses legitimacy and 

order is lost. 

(2) The individual is the basic building block of society. By protecting each 

individual, the whole of society is improved. 

g. Seventh, Do not Commit nor Tolerate Murder, Rape, Torture, Inhuman or Cruel 

Physical Mistreatment, or Excessive Use of Force. 

(1) Use only the force necessary to complete the mission. 

(2) Murder is the wrongful taking of life. If someone surrenders or is captured, 

they must be protected while in custody and control. 

(3) Inhuman or cruel physical mistreatment of an individual by a government 

official, either civilian or military, is absolutely prohibited. 

h. Eighth, Do not Commit nor Permit “Disappearances.” 

(1) People taken into custody will be accounted for at all times. 

(2) Contact with family should be permitted. 

i. Ninth, Do not Commit nor Tolerate the Unnecessary Destruction of Property. 

(1) Unauthorized taking of property is a crime. 

Appendix E-2 369 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

(2) Only property and material that directly contributes to the effort of opposing 

forces may be attacked. 

(3) Take care to avoid afflicting unnecessary destruction and unnecessary 

suffering. 

j. Tenth, Do not Commit nor Tolerate Illegal Punishment. 

(1) The military protects and defends. Leave the punishment to the courts. 

(2) Due Process must be followed. 

6. RESPONSIBILITY OF U.S. DoD PERSONNEL: The responsibility of U.S. DoD 

personnel (particularly those assigned or temporarily deployed to a foreign country) can 

be summarized by the “five R’s.” 

a. Recognize human rights violations. This involves recognizing unlawful action by 

a government official, or someone acting under the color of government authority, and 

distinguishing “gross violations” of human rights, e.g. murder, torture, rape, or 

disappearances, from other violations. Furthermore, one must be mindful that not all 

apparently “bad” conduct constitutes a human rights violation. 

b. Refrain from committing human rights violations. All DoD personnel are 

government officials, and government officials must not commit or aid in the commission 

of internationally recognized human rights violations. Moreover, DoD personnel may be 

responsible for the acts of subordinates and possibly the acts of fellow personnel. Upon 

encountering apparent gross violations of internationally recognized human rights in 

foreign countries, visiting DoD personnel should generally disengage from the activity 

and leave the area, provided they can disengage without impairing their mission. 

c. React to violations of internationally recognized human rights. If observed 

conduct of a U.S. government official involves a gross violation, such as murder, torture 

or rape, intervention to protect a victim is required. If observed conduct of a foreign 

government official involves a gross violation, intervention to protect a victim may be 

appropriate in certain limited cases: 

(1) The threat to life or limb is clear and compelling (e.g. without intervention, a 

death, dismemberment, or rape will almost certainly occur). 

(2) No other government officials or military personnel are able to intervene. 

(3) Intervention is possible without serious threat to the U.S. person’s safety, unit 

security, or mission. 

(4) Intervention involves no force or absolute minimum force to protect the victim 

(for example, shouting -- not shooting at perpetrator). The objective is to restore the 

status quo; not punish the perpetrator. 

(5) If an official’s conduct does not involve a gross violation, the person should 

follow the “report” procedures outlined. 

370 Appendix E-2 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

d. Record violations of internationally recognized human rights. 

(1) Subject to requirements of personnel/unit safety and of mission requirements, 

use available means to preserve evidence and record other details of any apparent 

violation of internationally recognized human rights. Such means may include 

photography and tape recording, as well as written notes and diagrams. 

(2) As the location may be later examined by professional investigators from the 

proper host nation authorities (or other international investigators -- United Nations, 

regional or perhaps U.S.), be cautious about entering the area where events took place 

and collecting items of evidence without clearance from higher authority. 

e. Report violations of internationally recognized human rights. 

(1) Report all instances of suspected violations of internationally recognized 

human rights immediately to higher authority (see paragraph 5.C.(1)); use the most 

secure communications means available. 

(2) Identify the official committing an offense, describe victim(s), specify the 

violating conduct, and state whether any U.S. DoD personnel were involved in any way. 

(3) As appropriate, provide recommendations as to what the commander should 

do to protect the victim(s), restore the status quo, and preserve the evidence of these 

events. 

7. REPRESENTATIVES: U.S. DoD personnel are visible representatives of U.S. legal 

and moral principles. Your actions, words, and deeds must reflect fundamental support 

of human rights, military honor, and the rule of law. 

8. USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Standing Orders card, SC Form 165, dated 1 

November 1997, constitutes legal and binding orders on all U.S. DoD personnel 

operating in the AOR. 

Appendix E-2 371 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX E
 

USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Standing Orders Card
 

The following card has been reproduced as a signed wallet-size item issued to all 

SOUTHCOM permanent party personnel, as well as all personnel temporarily deploying 

into the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. 

Cards can be obtained from the USSOUTHCOM Human Rights Division, SCJ5­

HR, at DSN: 567-XXXX or Commercial (305)437-XXXX, voice extensions: 

1572/1573/1560, fax: 1857. 

1 July 1998 

USSOUTHCOM HUMAN RIGHTS STANDING ORDERS 

 The U.S. Armed Forces support the UN and OAS standards of human 

rights to protect the integrity and dignity of each individual. Adherence to this 

policy strengthens the democratic process. 

 Human rights include fundamental protections for individuals such as 

freedom from torture or illegal killing. However, any severe and degrading 

physical mistreatment of any individual by a government official, either civilian 

or military, may be a human rights violation. 

 U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) personnel must never participate in any 

activity which is contrary to this human rights policy nor encourage others to 

do so. It is the duty of all U.S. DoD personnel to object to any possible human 

rights violation they observe, regardless of who is involved. 

 U.S. DoD personnel must immediately report to SOUTHCOM, through their 

chain of command, any activity they observe or hear about which they believe 

is a violation of human rights. 

 U.S. DoD personnel must fully cooperate with any investigation into human 

rights violations. 

 U.S. DoD personnel are visible representatives of United States legal and
 

moral principles. Their actions, words, and deeds must reflect fundamental
 

support of human rights, military honor, and the rule of law.
 

 This USSOUTHCOM card constitutes legal and binding orders on all U.S.
 

DoD personnel operating in the AOR.
 

372 Appendix E-2 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

1 July 1998 

SOUTHCOM REPORTING
 

PROCEDURES
 

THE FIVE RS OF HUMAN RIGHTS 

RECOGNIZE 

REFRAIN 

REACT 

RECORD 

REPORT 

SC FORM 165, 1 November 1997 

Appendix E-2 373 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX E-3: US SOUTHCOM STANDING ROE FOR DEPLOYED 

FORCES 

USSOUTHCOM
 

STANDING ROE FOR DEPLOYED FORCES
 

Deployments within the SOUTHCOM AOR generally occur under normal 

peacetime conditions. Under such circumstances, using deadly force to 

accomplish your mission is not necessary. However, should you be subject to an 

attack or a demonstration of hostile intent, these ROE are applicable. 

1. You always have the right to act in self-defense. 

2. In all cases, you are to use only the amount of force necessary to neutralize 

the attack or threat. 

3. You may use deadly force to protect your life and the lives of the members of 

your unit. Once the threat ends, the right to use deadly force stops. 

4. You may use deadly force to prevent the theft of property, such as weapons, 

which will pose an immediate threat to your life or the lives of members of your 

unit. 

5. You may also use deadly force to protect US Government property when its 

loss will adversely affect national security. Your chain of command will tell you 

which, if any, property on your deployment fits this criterion. 

6. You may detain persons who pose an immediate threat to use deadly force 

against you. Release them to appropriate host nation authorities as soon as 

practical. 

7. Disarm detained persons. Turn over the seized weapons to appropriate host 

nation authorities at soon as practical. 

8. ROE may change as the situation changes. Be prepared to adapt to new use 

of force authorizations as circumstances require. 

(Counterdrug Standing ROE omitted) 

374 Appendix E-3
 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX E-4: JTF AGUILA MEMORANDUM, SUBJECT: OFF LIMITS 

AREAS ON COMALAPA AIR BASE 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

HEADQUARTERS, JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA 

APO AA 34023-0008 

JTFA-C (27-20) 5 January 1999 

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION 

SUBJECT- Off Limits Areas on Comalapa Air Base 

1. Effective immediately, the following areas at Comalapa Air Base are off limits 

to JTF Aguila personnel: 

a. The Base Headquarters building and grounds. 

b. All security guard posts and towers. 

c. The airfield except when conducting official duties. 

d. The El Salvadoran dining area adjacent to the Humanitarian Operations 

Center (HOC), except for authorized attendance of religious services. 

e. All El Salvadoran offices and sleeping quarters unless specifically 

invited or when conducting official duties. 

f. The El Salvadoran Officers Club and NCO dining area except the area 

designated as the JTF Aguila Operation Center. 

g. The El Salvadoran Aid Station. 

h. Comalapa International Airport unless or, official business. 

2. Areas near the base housing are designated as quiet zones. Units will not sing 

cadence in these areas. 

3. Violation of this policy may be grounds for administrative or disciplinary action 

pursuant to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 

4. Joint Task Force Aguila personnel are encouraged to continue to interact with 

El Salvadoran personnel in authorized areas. 

Appendix E-4 375 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

VIRGIL L PACKETT II 

Colonel, JTF Aguila 

Commanding 

DISTRIBUTION: 

A 

376 Appendix E-4 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX E-5: JTF AGUILA POLICY LETTER #4, VEHICLE MOVEMENT 

OUTSIDE THE DESIGNATED COMPOUND OF COMALAPA AIR BASE, EL 

SALVADOR 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

HEADQUARTERS, JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA
 

APO AA 34023-0008
 

JTFA-C 18 DECEMBER 1998 

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION 

SUBJECT: Policy Letter #4, Vehicle Movement outside the designated 

compound of Comalapa Air Base, El Salvador 

1. Purpose. To re-state specified rules governing U.S. service member’s 

movement in civilian and military vehicles to and from Comalapa Air Base. 

2. Order. All personnel assigned to Comalapa Air Base will follow stated rules 

that govern the density of vehicles traveling, weapons, clothing worn, sign out 

procedures, cellular phone use, and accompaniment of U.S. personnel by 

Salvadoran police. 

3. Procedures. 

a. All travel by U.S. personnel will be in military uniform unless given permission 

from the JTF Aguila Command Group comprised of CSM Cameron, LTC Jones, 

COL Wideman, or COL Packett. 

b. Convoy Commanders will complete a convoy/weapons authorization 

memorandum prior to departure. The memorandum must be signed first by the 

J3 to verify that a Rules of Engagement briefing was received, then by the Chief 

of Staff for final approval authority. 

c. Convoy Commanders will sign out with the J3 prior to departure and sign in 

with the J3 immediately upon return. 

d. All movements require a two vehicle minimum convoy, one weapon per 

vehicle, positive communications with JTF HQ during mission, and a minimum of 

one Salvadoran policeman per convoy. 

e. Night movement is limited to missions involving airport pick-up/drop-off or 

missions to austere locations where completion of task may cause a return in 

hours of darkness. 

Appendix E-5 377 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

f. Any emergency situation involving U.S. personnel where an emergency convoy 

must be dispatched requires local authority involvement and strict adherence to 

procedures outlined in the JTF Aguila Emergency Procedures Handbook. 

4. Exceptions. 

a. Trips to and from airport and/or the local gas station are allowed to travel 

single vehicle if mission requirements have extended our availability of vehicles. 

This exception does not apply to night movements. All other rules apply. 

b. PAO personnel located at the JIB in San Salvador are allowed to travel to and 

from Comalapa Air Base in single vehicle convoys when the mission dictates. If 

JTF Aguila personnel are traveling with PAO JIB, all rules apply. 

c. The two vehicle rule does not apply to those agencies who have approved two 

vehicle rule waiver on file with the JTF Aguila Command Group. Waivers are for 

specific agencies governing Force Protection and will not be granted for routine 

missions. 

3. A Salvadoran police escort, comprised of two or more Salvadoran MPs with 

vehicle, may suffice for the second vehicle in above rules. Except in 

emergencies, coordination for this escort requires a minimum 24 hours notice. 

VIRGIL L. PACKETT II 

Colonel, JTF Aguila 

Commanding 

DISTRIBUTION: 

A 

378 Appendix E-5 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX F: ARMY REGULATION 27-26 EXTRACT, RULES OF 

PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT FOR LAWYERS (INTENTIONALLY BLANK) 

Army Regulation 27–26 

Legal Services 

Rules of 

Professional 

Conduct for 

Lawyers 

Headquarters 

Department of the Army 

Washington, DC 

1 May 1992 

Unclassified 

Appendix F 379 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

between such lawyers and their clients as it is to provide guidance 

to judge advocates practicing with such lawyers and to supervisory 

judge advocates who may be asked to inquire into an alleged fee 

irregularities. Absent Rule 1.5(a)-(e), such judge advocates have no 

readily available standard with which to consider allegedly questionable conduct of a private civilian lawyer. Rule 1.5(a)-(e) is the same 

as the American Bar Association Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5 (a)-(e) and thus reflects generally accepted professional 

standards. 

Basis or Rate of Fee 

When the lawyer has regularly represented a client, they ordinarily will have reached an understanding concerning the basis or rate 

of the fee. In a new client-lawyer relationship, however, an understanding as to the fee should be promptly established. It is not 

necessary to recite all the factors that underlie the basis of the fee, 

but only those that are directly involved in its computation. It is 

sufficient, for example, to state that the basic rate is an hourly 

charge, a fixed amount or an estimated amount, or to identify the 

factors that may be taken into account in finally fixing the fee. 

When developments occur during the representation that render an 

earlier estimate substantially inaccurate, a revised estimate should be 

provided to the client. A written statement concerning the fee reduces the possibility of misunderstanding. Furnishing the client with 

a simple memorandum or a copy of the lawyer’s customary fee 

schedule is sufficient if the basis or rate of fee is set forth. 

Terms of Payment 

A lawyer may require advance payment of a fee, but is obliged to 

return any unearned portion. See Rule 1.16(d). A lawyer may accept 

property in payment for services, such as an ownership interest in an 

enterprise, providing this does not involve acquisition of a proprietary interest in the cause of action or subject matter of the litigation 

contrary to Rule 1.8(j). However, a fee paid in property instead of 

money may be subject to special scrutiny because it involves questions concerning both the value of the services and the lawyer’s 

special knowledge of the value of the property. 

An agreement may not be made whose terms might induce 

the lawyer improperly to curtail services for the client or perform 

them in a way contrary to the client’s interest. For example, a 

lawyer should not enter into an agreement whereby services are to 

be provided only up to a stated amount when it is foreseeable that 

more extensive services probably will be required, unless the situation is adequately explained to the client. Otherwise, the client 

might have to bargain for further assistance in the midst of a 

proceeding or transaction. However, it is proper to define the extent 

of services in light of the client’s ability to pay. A lawyer should not 

exploit a fee arrangement based primarily on hourly charges by 

using wasteful procedures. Where there is doubt whether a contingent fee is consistent with the client’s best interest, the lawyer 

should offer the client alternative bases for the fee and explain their 

implications. Applicable law may impose limitations on contingent 

fees, such as a ceiling on the percentage. 

Division of Fee 

A division of fee is a single billing to a client covering the fee of 

two or more lawyers who are not in the same firm. A division of fee 

facilitates association of more than one lawyer in a matter in which 

neither alone could serve the client as well, and most often is used 

when the fee is contingent and the division is between a referring 

lawyer and a trial specialist. Paragraph (e) permits the lawyer to 

divide a fee on either the basis of the proportion of services they 

render or by agreement between the participating lawyers if all 

assume responsibility for the representation as a whole and the 

client is advised and does not object. It does not require disclosure 

to the client of the share that each lawyer is to receive. Joint 

responsibility for the representation entails the obligations stated in 

Rule 5.1 for purposes of the matter involved. 

Disputes over Fees 

If a procedure has been established for resolution of fee disputes, 

such as an arbitration or mediation procedure established by the bar, 

the lawyer should conscientiously consider submitting to it. Law 

may prescribe a procedure for determining a lawyer’s fee, for example, in representation of an executor or administrator, a class or a 

person entitled to a reasonable fee as part of the measure of damages. The lawyer entitled to such a fee and a lawyer representing 

another party concerned with the fee should comply with the prescribed procedure. 

Military Representation and Referral 

Army lawyers may neither request nor accept any gratuity, salary 

or other compensation from any source as payment for performance 

of official Army duties. For example, a legal assistance officer is 

prohibited from accepting a gift or a loan from a client tendered as a 

result of assistance rendered. 

Army lawyers may not request or accept any gratuity, salary, or 

other compensation from a client obtained incident to the performance of duties as an officer or employee of the Army. For example, 

a legal assistance officer (including a reservist being utilized as a 

legal assistance officer such as during drills or as a Special Legal 

Assistance Officer) may not receive any actual or constructive compensation or benefit for or in connection with referring to private 

practice (including one in which the referring lawyer engages during 

off-duty hours) a matter the lawyer first become involved with in a 

military legal assistance capacity. This rule precludes the legal assistance officer from referring a client originally seen in a legal 

assistance capacity to himself or herself or to the firm in which the 

lawyer works in a private capacity concerning the same general 

matter for which the client was seen in legal assistance unless no fee 

or other compensation is charged. It does not preclude the lawyer 

from representing military personnel or dependents in a private 

capacity concerning new matters, even though the relationship might 

have been first established in a military legal assistance capacity. 

The rule prohibits a lawyer from using an official position to solicit 

or obtain clients for a private practice. 

CROSS REFERENCES: 

Rule 1.2 Scope of Representation 

Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: GeneralRule 

Rule 1.8 Conflict of Interest: Prohibited Transactions 

Rule 1.16 Declining or Terminating Representation 

RULE 1.6 Confidentiality of Information. 

(a) A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to representation of a client unless the client consents after consultation, except 

for disclosures that are impliedly authorized in order to carry out the 

representation, and except as stated in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d). 

(b) A lawyer shall reveal such information to the extent the 

lawyer reasonably believes necessary to prevent the client from 

committing a criminal act that the lawyer believes is likely to result 

in imminent death or substantial bodily harm, or significant impairment of national security or the readiness or capability of a military 

unit, vessel, aircraft, or weapon system. 

(c) A lawyer may reveal such information to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to establish a claim or defense on 

behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the 

client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim 

against the lawyer based upon conduct in which the client was 

involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning 

the lawyer’s representation of the client. 

(d) An Army lawyer may reveal such information when required 

or authorized to do so by law. 

COMMENT: 

The lawyer is part of a judicial system charged with upholding 

AR 27–26 • 1 May 1992 

380 Appendix F 

7 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

the law. One of the lawyer’s functions is to advise clients so that 

they avoid any violation of the law in the proper exercise of their 

rights. 

The observance of the ethical obligation of a lawyer to hold 

inviolate confidential information of the client not only facilitates 

the full development of facts essential to proper representation of 

the client but also encourages people to seek early legal assistance. 

Almost without exception, clients come to lawyers in order to 

determine what their rights are and what is, in the maze of laws and 

regulations, deemed to be legal and correct. The common law recognizes that the client’s confidences must be protected from disclosure. Based upon experience, lawyers know that most clients follow 

the advice given, and the law is upheld. 

A fundamental principle in the client-lawyer relationship is that 

the lawyer maintain confidentiality of information relating to the 

representation. The client is thereby encouraged to communicate 

fully and frankly with the lawyer even as to embarrassing or legally 

damaging subject matter. 

The principle of confidentiality is given effect in two related 

bodies of law, the attorney-client privilege (which includes the work 

product doctrine) in the law of evidence and the rule of confidentiality established in professional ethics. The attorney-client privilege applies in judicial and other proceedings in which a lawyer 

may be called as a witness or otherwise required to produce evidence concerning a client. The rule of client-lawyer confidentiality 

applies in situations other than those where evidence is sought from 

the lawyer through compulsion of law. The confidentiality rule applies not merely to matters communicated in confidence by the 

client but also to all information relating to the representation, whatever its source. A lawyer may not disclose such information except 

as authorized or required by these Rules of Professional Conduct or 

other lawful order, regulation or statute. 

The preservation of client confidentiality also may be affected by 

the nature of the facilities available. Army lawyers should have 

enclosed private offices which afford the degree of privacy necessary to preserve confidentiality. Under any circumstances, an Army 

lawyer must strive to avoid allowing unauthorized persons to overhear confidential conversations. Control or access by others to automated data processing systems or equipment utilized by the lawyer 

also must be considered. Control or access by personnel who are not 

subject to the Rules, or supervised by those subject to these Rules, 

may lead to a violation of the confidentiality required by this Rule. 

The requirement of maintaining confidentiality of information relating to representation applies to government lawyers who may 

disagree with the policy goals that their representation is designed to 

advance. 

Authorized Disclosure 

A l a w y e r i s i m p l i e d l y a u t h o r i z e d t o m a k e d i s c l o s u r e s a b o u t 

a client when appropriate in carrying out the representation, except 

to the extent that the client’s instructions or special circumstances 

limit that authority. In litigation, for example, a lawyer may disclose 

information by admitting a fact that cannot properly be disputed, or 

in negotiation by making a disclosure that facilitates a satisfactory 

conclusion. 

Lawyers may disclose to supervisory lawyers and to paralegals, 

subject to the direction and control of the lawyer or the lawyer’s 

supervisory lawyer, information relating to a client, unless the client 

has instructed that particular information be confined to specified 

lawyers, or unless otherwise prohibited by these Rules of Professional Conduct or other lawful order, regulation, or statute. 

Disclosure Adverse to Client 

The confidentiality rule is subject to limited exceptions. In becoming privy to information about a client, a lawyer may foresee 

that the client intends serious harm to another person. However, to 

the extent a lawyer is required or permitted to disclose a client’s 

purposes, the client will be inhibited from revealing facts which 

would enable the lawyer to counsel against a wrongful course of 

action. The public is better protected if full and open communication by the client is encouraged than if it is inhibited. Several 

situations must be distinguished. 

First, the lawyer may not counsel or assist a client in conduct that 

is criminal or fraudulent. See Rule 1.2(d). Similarly, a lawyer owes 

a duty of candor to the court and has a duty under Rule 3.3(a)(3) 

not to use false evidence. These duties are essentially special instances of the duty prescribed in Rule 1.2(d) to avoid assisting a 

client in criminal or fraudulent conduct. 

S e c o n d , t h e l a w y e r m a y h a v e b e e n i n n o c e n t l y i n v o l v e d i n 

past conduct by the client that was criminal or fraudulent. In such a 

situation the lawyer has not violated Rule 1.2(d), because to “counsel or assist”criminal or fraudulent conduct requires knowing that 

the conduct is of that character. 

Third, the lawyer may learn that a client intends prospective 

conduct that is criminal and likely to result in imminent death or 

substantial bodily harm, or significant impairment of national security or of the readiness or capability of a military unit, vessel, 

aircraft, or weapon system. As stated in paragraph (b), the lawyer 

has a professional obligation to reveal information to the extent that 

lawyer reasonably believes necessary to prevent such consequences. 

Examples of conduct likely to result in the significant impairment 

of the readiness or capability of a military unit, vessel, aircraft, or 

weapon system include: divulging the classified location of a special operations unit such that the lives of members of the unit are 

placed in immediate danger; sabotaging a vessel or aircraft to the 

extent that the vessel or aircraft and crew will be lost; compromising the security of a weapons site such that the weapons are likely 

to be stolen or detonated. Paragraph (b) is not intended to and does 

not mandate the disclosure of conduct which may have a slight 

impact on the readiness or capability of a unit, vessel, aircraft or 

weapon system. Examples of such conduct are: absence without 

authority from a peacetime training exercise; intentional damage to 

an individually assigned weapon; and intentional minor damage to 

military property. 

In any case, a disclosure adverse to the client’s interest should be 

no greater than the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to the 

purpose. 

Withdrawal 

If the lawyer’s services will be used by the client in materially 

furthering a course of criminal or fraudulent conduct, the lawyer 

must seek to withdraw, as stated in Rule 1.16(a)(1). 

After withdrawal the lawyer is required to refrain from making 

disclosure of the client’s confidence, except as otherwise provided 

in Rule 1.6. Nothing in this Rule, Rule 1.8(b) or Rule 1.16(d) 

prevents the lawyer from giving notice of the fact of withdrawal, 

and the lawyer may also withdraw or disaffirm any opinion, document, affirmation, or the like. 

W h e r e t h e c l i e n t i s t h e A r m y , t h e l a w y e r m a y b e i n d o u b t 

whether contemplated conduct will actually be carried out. Where 

necessary to guide conduct in connection with the Rule, the lawyer 

may make inquiry within the Army as indicated in Rule 1.13(c). 

Dispute Concerning a Lawyer’s Conduct 

Where a legal claim or disciplinary charge alleges complicity of 

the lawyer in a client’s conduct or other misconduct of the lawyer 

involving representation of the client, the lawyer may respond to the 

extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to establish a defense. The same is true with respect to a claim involving the conduct or representation of a former client. The lawyer’s right to 

respond arises when an assertion of such complicity has been made. 

Paragraph (c) does not require the lawyer to await the commencement of an action or proceeding that charges such complicity, so 

that the defense may be established by responding directly to a third 

party who has made such an assertion. The right to defend, of 

course, applies where a proceeding has been commenced. Where 

practicable and not prejudicial to the lawyer’s ability to establish the 

defense, the lawyer should advise the client of the third party’s 

assertion and request that the client respond appropriately. In any 

event, disclosure should be no greater than the lawyer reasonably 

AR 27–26 • 1 May 1992 

Appendix F 381 

8 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

believes is necessary to vindicate innocence, the disclosure should 

be made in a manner which limits access to the information to the 

tribunal or other persons having a need to know it, and appropriate 

protective orders or other arrangements should be sought by the 

lawyer to the fullest extent practicable. 

If the lawyer is charged with wrongdoing in which the client’s 

conduct is implicated, the rule of confidentiality should not prevent 

the lawyer from defending against the charge. Such a charge can 

arise in a civil, criminal or professional disciplinary proceeding, and 

can be based on a wrong allegedly committed by the lawyer against 

the client, or a wrong alleged by a third person; for example, a 

person claiming to have been defrauded by the lawyer and client 

acting together. A non-government lawyer entitled to a fee is permitted by paragraph (b)(2) to prove the services rendered in an 

action to collect it. This aspect of the Rule expresses the principle 

that the beneficiary of a fiduciary relationship may not exploit it to 

the detriment of the fiduciary. As stated above, the lawyer must 

make every effort practicable to avoid unnecessary disclosure of 

information relating to a representation, to limit disclosure to those 

having the need to know it, and to obtain protective orders or make 

other arrangements minimizing the risk of disclosure. 

Disclosure Otherwise Required or Authorized 

The attorney-client privilege is defined by Military Rule of Evidence 502. If a lawyer is called as a witness to give testimony 

concerning a client, absent waiver by the client, Rule 1.6(a) requires 

the lawyer to invoke the privilege when it is applicable. The lawyer 

must comply with the final orders of a court or other tribunal of 

c o m p e t e n t j u r i s d i c t i o n r e q u i r i n g t h e l a w y e r t o g i v e i n f o r m a t i o n 

about the client. 

These Rules of Professional Conduct in various circumstances 

permit or require a lawyer to disclose information relating to the 

representation. See Rules 2.2, 2.3, 3.3 and 4.1. In addition to these 

provisions, a lawyer may be obligated or permitted by other provisions of law to give information about a client. Whether another 

provision of law supersedes Rule 1.6 is a matter of interpretation 

beyond the scope of these Rules, but a presumption should exist 

against such a supersession. 

Former Client 

The identification of the client, for purposes of the Army Lawyer, 

is important to the application of this rule. Generally the agency is 

the Army lawyer’s client. Communications by an Army lawyer both 

inside and outside of the agency may or may not violate this rule. 

An Army Lawyer’s duty under this rule is affected by statutes, 

regulations and other lawful directives. 

Paragraph (d) permits disclosures that the agency authorizes its 

lawyers to make in connection with the performance of their duties 

to the agency. These disclosures may be required by statute, Executive Order, regulation or directive, depending upon the authority of 

the agency to issue such order. An attorney may reveal information 

when authorized by law and must reveal information when required 

to do so by law. 

There are circumstances in which an Army Lawyer may be assigned to provide an individual with counsel or representation in 

which it is clear that an obligation of confidentiality adheres to that 

individual and not the agency. Examples include judge advocates 

who provide defense counsel or legal assistance services to individuals. It would also include Army Lawyers who have been approved 

by their Senior Counsel or the Senior Counsel’s designee to provide 

legal service to an individual with regard to a specific legal matter. 

The duty of confidentiality continues after the client-lawyer relationship has terminated. 

CROSS REFERENCES: 

Rule 1.1 Competence 

Rule 1.2 Scope of Representation 

Rule 1.8 Conflict of Interest: Prohibited Transactions 

Rule 1.13 Army as Client 

Rule 1.16 Declining and Terminating Representation 

Rule 2.1 Advisor 

Rule 2.2 Intermediary 

Rule 2.3 Evaluation for Use by Third Persons 

Rule 3.3 Candor toward the Tribunal 

Rule 4.1 Truthfulness of Statements to Others 

Rule 5.4 Professional Independence of a Lawyer 

RULE 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General Rule. 

(a) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of 

that client will be directly adverse to another client, unless; 

(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not 

adversely affect the relationship with the other client; and 

(2) each client consents after consultation. 

(b) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of 

that client may be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities 

to another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer’s own 

interests, unless; 

(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be 

adversely affected; and 

(2) the client consents after consultation. When representation of 

multiple clients in a single matter is undertaken, the consultation 

shall include explanation of the implications of the common representation and the advantages and risks involved. 

COMMENT: 

Loyalty is an essential element in the lawyer’s relationship to a 

client. An impermissible conflict of interest may exist before representation is undertaken, in which event the representation should be 

declined. If such a conflict arises after representation has been 

undertaken, the lawyer should seek to withdraw from the representation. See Rule 1.16. Where more than one client is involved and the 

lawyer is permitted to withdraw because a conflict arises after representation, whether the lawyer may continue to represent any of the 

clients is determined by Rule 1.9. See also Rule 2.2(c). As to 

whether a client-lawyer relationship exists or, having once been 

established, is continuing, see Comment to Rule 1.3. 

As a general proposition, loyalty to a client prohibits undertaking 

representation directly adverse to that client without that client’s 

consent. Paragraph (a) expresses that general rule. Thus, a lawyer 

ordinarily may not act as advocate against a person the lawyer 

represents in some other matter, even if it is wholly unrelated. On 

the other hand, simultaneous representation in unrelated matters of 

clients whose interests are only generally adverse, does not require 

consent of the respective clients. Paragraph (a) applies only when 

the representation of one client would be directly adverse to the 

other. 

Loyalty to a client is also impaired when a lawyer cannot consider, recommend or carry out an appropriate course of action for the 

client because of the lawyer’s other responsibilities or interests. The 

conflict in effect forecloses alternatives that would otherwise be 

available to the client. Paragraph (b) addresses such situations. A 

possible conflict does not itself preclude the representation. The 

critical questions are the likelihood that a conflict will eventuate 

and, if it does, whether it will materially interfere with the lawyer’s 

independent professional judgment in considering alternatives or 

foreclose courses of action that reasonably should be pursued on 

behalf of the client. Consideration should be given to whether the 

client wishes to accommodate the other interest involved. 

Consultation and Consent 

A client including an organization (see Rule 1.13c)(b), may consent to representation notwithstanding a conflict. However, as indic a t e d i n R u l e 1 . 7 ( a ) ( 1 ) w i t h r e s p e c t t o r e p r e s e n t a t i o n d i r e c t l y 

adverse to a client, and Rule 1.7(b)(1) with respect to material 

limitations on representation of a client, when a disinterested lawyer 

would conclude that the client should not agree to the representation 

under the circumstances, the lawyer involved cannot properly ask 

for such agreement to provide representation on the basis of the 

AR 27–26 • 1 May 1992 

382 Appendix F 

9 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

client’s consent. When more than one client is involved, the question of conflict must be resolved as to each client. Moreover, there 

may be circumstances where it is impossible to make the disclosure 

necessary to obtain consent. For example, when the lawyer represents different clients in related matters and one of the clients 

refuses to consent to the disclosure necessary to permit the other 

client to make an informed decision, the lawyer cannot properly ask 

the latter to consent. 

Lawyer’s Interests 

The lawyer’s own interests should not be permitted to have an 

adverse effect on representation of a client. For example, a military 

lawyer’s desire to take leave or transfer duty stations should not 

motivate the lawyer to recommend a pretrial agreement in a case. If 

the propriety of a lawyer’s own conduct in a transaction is in serious 

question, it may be difficult or impossible for the lawyer to give a 

client detached advice. A lawyer may not allow related business 

interests to affect representation, for example, by referring clients to 

an enterprise in which the lawyer has an undisclosed interest. 

Conflicts of Litigation 

Paragraph (a) prohibits representation of opposing parties in litigation. Simultaneous representation of parties whose interests in 

litigation may conflict, such as co-plaintiffs or co-defendants, is 

governed by paragraph (b). An impermissible conflict may exist by 

reason of substantial discrepancy in the parties’ testimony, incompatibility in positions in relation to an opposing party or the fact 

that there are substantially different possibilities of settlement of the 

claims or liabilities in question. Such conflicts can arise in criminal 

cases as well as civil. The potential for conflict of interest in 

representing multiple accused in a criminal case is so grave that 

ordinarily a lawyer should not represent more than one co-accused. 

On the other hand, common representation of persons having similar 

interests is proper if the risk of adverse effect is minimal and the 

requirements of paragraph (b) are met. Compare Rule 2.2 involving 

intermediation between clients. 

Ordinarily, a lawyer may not act as advocate against a client the 

lawyer represents in some other matter, even if the other matter is 

wholly unrelated. However, there are circumstances in which a 

lawyer may act as advocate against a client. For example, Government lawyers in some circumstances may represent Government 

employees in proceedings in which a Government agency is the 

o p p o s i n g p a r t y . T h e p r o p r i e t y o f c o n c u r r e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n c a n 

depend on the nature of the litigation. For example, a suit charging 

f r a u d e n t a i l s c o n f l i c t t o a d e g r e e n o t i n v o l v e d i n a s u i t f o r a 

declaratory judgment concerning statutory interpretation. 

A lawyer may represent parties having antagonistic positions on a 

legal question that has arisen in different cases, unless representation of either client would be adversely affected. Thus, it is ordinarily proper to assert such positions in cases pending in different 

trial courts, but it may be improper to do so in cases pending at the 

same time in an appellate court. 

Interest of a Person Paying for a Lawyer’s Service 

A civilian lawyer practicing before a tribunal conducted pursuant 

to the Manual for Courts-Martial or the Uniform Code of Military 

Justice may be paid from a source other than the client, if the client 

is informed of that fact, consents and the arrangement does not 

compromise the lawyer’s duty of loyalty to the client. See Rule 

1.8(f). For example, an accused soldier’s family may pay a civilian 

lawyer to represent the soldier at a court-martial. 

Other Conflict Situations 

Conflicts of interest in contexts other than litigation sometimes 

may be difficult to assess. Relevant factors in determining whether 

there is potential for adverse effect include the duration and intimacy of the lawyer’s relationship with the client or clients involved, 

the functions being performed by the lawyer, the likelihood that 

actual conflict will arise and the likely prejudice to the client from 

the conflict if it does arise. The question is often one of the proximity and degree. 

For example, a legal assistance attorney may not represent both 

parties in a negotiation whose interests are fundamentally antagonistic to each other, but common representation is permissible where 

the clients are generally aligned in interest even though there is 

some difference of interest among them. Such cases of common 

interest might include advising a buyer and seller of an auto and 

preparing a bill of sale for them. 

Conflict questions may also arise in estate planning. A lawyer 

may be called upon to prepare wills for several family members, 

such as husband and wife, and, depending upon the circumstances, a 

conflict of interest may arise. 

Conflict Charged by an Opposing Party 

While the lawyer must be careful to avoid conflict of interest 

situations, resolving questions of conflict of interest is primarily the 

responsibility of the supervisory lawyer or the military judge. See 

also Rule 5.1. In litigation, a court may raise the question when 

there is reason to infer that the lawyer has neglected the responsibility. In a criminal case, inquiry by the court is generally required 

when a lawyer represents multiple coaccused. Where the conflict is 

such as clearly to call in question the fair or efficient administration 

of justice, opposing counsel may properly raise the question. Such 

an objection should be viewed with caution, however, for it can be 

misused as a technique of harassment. 

CROSS REFERENCES: 

Rule 1.1 Competence 

Rule 1.2 Scope 

Rule 1.4 Communication 

Rule 1.8 Conflict of Interest: Prohibited Transactions 

Rule 1.9 Conflict of Interest: Former Client 

Rule 1.12 Former Judge or Arbitrator 

Rule 1.13 Army as Client 

Rule 1.16 Declining or Terminating Representation 

Rule 2.2 Intermediary 

Rule 2.3 Evaluation for Use by Third Person 

Rule 5.1 Responsibilities of the Senior Counsel and Supervisory 

Lawyers 

Rule 5.4 Professional Independence of a Lawyer 

RULE 1.8 Conflict of Interest: Prohibited Transactions 

(a) A lawyer shall not enter into a business transaction with a 

client or knowingly acquire an ownership, possessory, security, or 

other pecuniary interest adverse to a client unless; 

(1) the transaction and terms on which the lawyer acquires the 

interest are fair and reasonable to the client and are fully disclosed 

and transmitted in writing to the client in a manner which can be 

reasonably understood by the client; 

(2) the client is given a reasonable opportunity to seek the advice 

of independent counsel in the transaction; and 

(3) the client consents in writing thereto. 

(b) A lawyer shall not use information relating to representation 

of a client to the disadvantage of the client unless the client consents 

after consultation. 

(c) A lawyer shall not prepare an instrument giving the lawyer or 

a person related to the lawyer as parent, child, sibling, or spouse any 

substantial gift from a client, including a testamentary gift, except 

where the client is related to the donee. 

(d) While representing a client, a lawyer shall not make or negotiate an agreement giving the lawyer literary or media rights to a 

portrayal or account based in substantial part on information relating 

to the representation. 

(e) A lawyer shall not provide financial assistance to a client in 

connection with pending or contemplated litigation except that a 

civilian lawyer practicing before a tribunal conducted pursuant to 

the Manual for Courts-Martial or the Uniform Code of Military 

AR 27–26 • 1 May 1992 

Appendix F 383 

10 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Justice representing an indigent client may pay court costs and 

expenses of litigation on behalf of the client. 

(f) A lawyer shall not accept compensation for representing a 

client from one other than the client unless; 

(1) the client consents after consultation; 

(2) there is no interference with the lawyer’s independence of 

professional judgment or with the lawyer-client relationship;and 

(3) information relating to representation of a client is protected 

as required by Rule 1.6. 

(g) A lawyer who represents two or more clients shall not participate in making an aggregate settlement of the claims of or against 

the clients, or in a criminal case an aggregate agreement as to guilty 

pleas, unless each client consents after consultation, including disclosure of the existence and nature of all the claims or pleas involved and of the participation of each person in the settlement. 

(h) A lawyer shall not make an agreement prospectively limiting 

the lawyer’s liability to a client for malpractice unless permitted by 

law and the client is independently represented in making the agreement, or settle a claim for such liability with an unrepresented client 

or former client without first advising that person in writing that 

independent representation is appropriate in connection therewith. 

(i) A lawyer related to another lawyer as parent, child, sibling, or 

spouse shall not represent a client in a representation directly adverse to a person who the lawyer knows is represented by the other 

lawyer except upon consent by the client after consultation regarding the relationship. 

(j) A lawyer shall not acquire a proprietary interest in the cause 

of action or subject matter of litigation the lawyer is conducting for 

a client. 

COMMENT: 

Army Lawyers 

Army lawyers will strictly adhere to Department of the Army 

standards of conduct regulations in all dealings with clients. Such 

r e g u l a t i o n s g e n e r a l l y p r o h i b i t e n t e r i n g i n t o b u s i n e s s t r a n s a c t i o n s 

with clients, deriving financial benefit from representations of clients, and accepting gifts from clients or other entities for the performance of official duties. This rule does not authorize conduct 

otherwise prohibited by such regulations. An Army lawyer will not 

make any referrals of legal or other business to any private civilian 

lawyer or enterprise with whom the Army lawyer has any present or 

expected direct or indirect personal interest. Special care will be 

taken to avoid giving preferential treatment to reserve judge advocates or other government lawyers in their private capacities. 

Transactions Between Client and Lawyer 

As a general principle, all business transactions between client 

and lawyer should be fair and reasonable to the client. In such 

transactions a review by independent counsel on behalf of the client 

is often advisable. Furthermore, a lawyer may not exploit information relating to the representation to the client’s disadvantage. For 

example, a lawyer who has learned that the client is investing in 

specific real estate may not, without the client’s consent, seek to 

acquire nearby property where doing so would adversely affect the 

client’s plan for investment. Paragraph (a) does not, however, apply 

to standard commercial transactions between the lawyer and the 

client for products or services that the client generally markets to 

others, for example, banking or brokerage services, medical services, products manufactured or distributed by the client, and utilities’ services. In such transactions, the lawyer has no advantage in 

dealing with the client, and the restrictions in paragraph (a) are 

unnecessary and impracticable. All transactions must comply with 

promulgated standards of conduct and other lawful orders and regulations. See also Rule 1.5. 

Rule 1.8(e) does not prohibit de minimis financial assistance to a 

client such as a trial defense counsel’s purchase of an authorized 

r i b b o n f o r w e a r o n t h e a c c u s e d’s u n i f o r m d u r i n g c o u r t - m a r t i a l 

proceedings. 

Literary Rights 

An agreement by which a lawyer acquires literary or media rights 

concerning the conduct of the representation creates a conflict between the interests of the client and the personal interests of the 

lawyer. Measures suitable in the representation of the client may 

d e t r a c t f r o m t h e p u b l i c a t i o n v a l u e o f a n a c c o u n t o f t h e 

representation. 

Person Paying for a Lawyer’s Services 

Rule 1.8(f) requires disclosure of the fact that the lawyer’s services are being paid for by a third party. Such an arrangement must 

also conform to the requirements of Rule 1.6 concerning confidentiality and Rule 1.7 concerning conflict of interest. 

Family Relationships Between Lawyers 

Rule 1.8(i) applies to related lawyers who are in different offices, 

e.g., one lawyer is a trial counsel in a staff judge advocate office 

and one lawyer is a trial defense counsel serving the same staff 

judge advocate office. Related lawyers in the same office are governed by Rules 1.7, 1.9, and 1.10. The disqualification stated in Rule 

1.8(i) is personal and is not imputed to other lawyers in the offices 

with whom the lawyer performs duty. 

Acquisition of Interest in Litigation 

Rule 1.8(j) states the traditional general rule that lawyers are 

prohibited from acquiring a proprietary interest in litigation. This 

general rule, which has its basis in common law champerty and 

m a i n t e n a n c e , i s s u b j e c t t o s p e c i f i c e x c e p t i o n s d e v e l o p e d i n 

decisional law and continued in these Rules, such as the exception 

for reasonable contingent fees set forth in Rule 1.5 and the exception for certain advances of the costs of litigation set forth in 

paragraph (e). 

The Rule is not intended to apply to customary qualifications and 

limitations in legal opinions and memoranda. 

CROSS REFERENCES: 

Rule 1.1 Competence 

Rule 1.2 Scope of Representation 

Rule 1.5 Fees 

Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General Rule 

Rule 1.9 Conflict of Interest: Former Client 

Rule 1.16 Declining or Terminating Representation 

RULE 1.9 Conflict of Interest: Former Client 

(a) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter 

shall not thereafter; 

(1) represent another person in the same or a substantially related 

matter in which the person’s interests are materially adverse to the 

interests of the client unless the former client consents after consultation; or 

(2) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as Rule 1.6 would permit with 

respect to a client or when the information has become generally 

known. 

(b) An Army lawyer shall not knowingly represent a second 

client in the same or a substantially related matter in which a firm 

with which the lawyer formerly associated had previously represented a client; 

(1) whose interests are materially adverse to that second client; 

and 

(2) about whom the lawyer had acquired information protected 

by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) that is material to the matter. 

(c) An Army lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a 

matter or whose present or former firm has formerly represented a 

client in a matter shall not thereafter; 

AR 27–26 • 1 May 1992 

384 Appendix F 

11 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

(1) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as Rule 1.6 would permit with 

respect to a client or when the information has become generally 

known. 

(2) reveal information relating to the representation except as 

Rule 1.6 or Rule 3.3 would permit or require with respect to a 

client. 

COMMENT: 

After termination of a client-lawyer relationship, a lawyer may 

not represent another client except in conformity with this Rule. The 

principles in Rule 1.7 determine whether the interests of the present 

and former client are adverse. Thus, a lawyer could not properly 

seek to rescind on behalf of a new client a contract drafted on 

behalf of the former client. So also a lawyer who has defended an 

accused at trial could not properly act as appellate Government 

counsel in the appellate review of the accused’s case. 

The scope of a “matter”for purposes of Rule 1.9(a) may depend 

on the facts of a particular situation or transaction. The lawyer’s 

involvement in a matter can also be a question of degree. When a 

lawyer has been directly involved in a specific transaction, subsequent representation of other clients with materially adverse intere s t s c l e a r l y i s p r o h i b i t e d . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a l a w y e r w h o 

recurrently handled a type of problem for a former client is not 

precluded from later representing another client in a wholly distinct 

problem of that type even though the subsequent representation 

involves a position adverse to the prior client. Thus, the reassignm e n t o f m i l i t a r y l a w y e r s b e t w e e n d e f e n s e , p r o s e c u t i o n , r e v i e w , 

claim and legal assistance functions within the same military jurisdiction is not precluded by this Rule. 

The underlying question is whether the lawyer was so involved in 

a particular matter that the subsequent representation can be justly 

regarded as a changing of sides in the matter in question. 

Information acquired by the lawyer in the course of representing a 

client may not subsequently be used by the lawyer to the disadvantage of the client. However, the fact that a lawyer has once served a 

client does not preclude the lawyer from using generally known 

information about that client when later representing another client. 

Disqualification from subsequent representation is for the protection of clients and can be waived by them. A waiver is effective 

only if there is disclosure of the circumstances, including the lawyer’s role in behalf of the new client. 

Rule 1.9(b) and (c) make clear that the foregoing applies to Army 

lawyers with respect to the clients whom they previously served 

while in private practice. 

With regard to an opposing party’s raising a question of conflict 

of interest, see Comment to Rule 1.7. 

CROSS REFERENCES: 

Rule 1.1 Competence 

Rule 1.2 Scope of Representation 

Rule 1.6 Confidentiality 

Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General Rule 

Rule 1.16 Declining or Terminating Representation 

Rule 2.2 Intermediary 

RULE 1.10 Imputed Disqualification: General Rule 

(a) Army lawyers working in the same Army law office are not 

automatically disqualified from representing a client because any of 

them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so by Rules 

1.7, 1.8(c), 1.9 or 2.2. 

(b) When an Army lawyer has terminated an association with a 

firm, the firm is not prohibited from thereafter representing a person 

with interests materially adverse to those of a client represented by 

the formerly associated lawyer and not currently represented by the 

firm, unless; 

(1) the matter is the same or substantially related to that in which 

the formerly associated lawyer represented the client; and 

(2) any lawyer remaining in the firm has information protected 

by Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) that is material to the matter. 

(c) A disqualification under this Rule may be waived by the 

affected client under the conditions stated in Rule 1.7. 

COMMENT: 

The circumstances of military service may require representation 

of opposing sides by Army lawyers working in the same law office. 

Such representation is permissible so long as conflicts of interest are 

avoided and independent judgment, zealous representation, and protection of confidences are not compromised. Thus, the principle of 

imputed disqualification is not automatically controlling for Army 

lawyers. The knowledge, actions, and conflicts of interest of one 

lawyer are not to be imputed to another simply because they operate 

from the same office. For example, the fact that a number of defense attorneys operate from one office and share clerical assistance, 

would not prohibit them from representing co-accused at trial by 

court-martial. 

Army policy may address imputed disqualification in certain contexts. For example, Army policy discourages representation by one 

legal assistance office of both spouses involved in a domestic dispute. 

Whether a lawyer is disqualified requires a functional analysis of 

the facts in a specific situation. The analysis should include consideration of whether the following will be compromised; preserving 

attorney-client confidentiality; maintaining independence of judgment; and avoiding positions adverse to a client. 

Preserving confidentiality is a question of access to information. 

Access to information, in turn, is essentially a question of fact in a 

particular circumstance, aided by inferences, deductions or working 

presumptions that reasonably may be made about the way in which 

lawyers work together. A lawyer may have general access to files of 

all clients of a military law office and may regularly participate in 

discussions of their affairs; it may be inferred that such a lawyer in 

fact is privy to all information about all the office’s clients. In 

contrast, another lawyer may have access to the files of only a 

limited number of clients and participate in discussion of the affairs 

of no other clients; in the absence of information to the contrary, it 

should be inferred that such a lawyer in fact is privy to information 

about the clients actually served but not to information of other 

clients. Additionally, a lawyer changing duty stations or changing 

assignments within an office has a continuing duty to preserve 

confidentiality of information about a client formerly represented. 

See Rules 1.6 and 1.9. 

Maintaining independent judgment allows a lawyer to consider, 

recommend and carry out any appropriate course of action for a 

client without regard to the lawyer’s personal interests or the interests of another. When such independence is lacking or unlikely, 

representation cannot be zealous. 

Another aspect of loyalty to a client is the lawyer’s obligation to 

decline subsequent representations involving positions adverse to a 

former client in substantially related matters. This obligation requires abstention from adverse representation by the individual lawy e r i n v o l v e d , b u t d o e s n o t p r o p e r l y e n t a i l a b s t e n t i o n o f o t h e r 

lawyers in the same office through imputed disqualification. Hence 

this aspect of the problem is governed by Rule 1.9(a). 

Rules 1.10(b) and (c) address the imputed disqualification of the 

Army lawyer’s former law firm. These rules indicate that the conflict-of-interest principles in Rule 1.9 do not apply to the law firm 

except as indicated in these rules. 

AR 27–26 • 1 May 1992 

Appendix F 385 

12 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

CROSS REFERENCES: 

Rule 1.6 Confidentiality 

Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General Rule 

Rule 1.8 Conflict of Interest: Prohibited Transactions 

Rule 1.9 Conflict of Interest: Former Client 

Rule 2.2 Intermediary 

RULE 1.11 Successive Government and Private Employment 

(a) Except as law may otherwise expressly permit, a lawyer shall 

not represent a private client in connection with a matter in which 

the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a public officer or employee. No lawyer in a firm with which that lawyer is 

associated may knowingly undertake or continue representation in 

such a matter unless; 

(1) the disqualified lawyer is screened from any participation in 

the matter and is apportioned no part of the fee therefrom; and 

(2) written notice is promptly given to the appropriate Government agency to enable it to ascertain compliance with the provisions 

of this Rule. 

(b) Except as law may otherwise expressly permit, a lawyer having information that the lawyer knows is confidential Government 

information about a person acquired when the lawyer was a public 

officer or employee, may not represent a private client whose interests are adverse to that person in a matter in which the information 

could be used to the material disadvantage of that person. A firm 

with which that lawyer is associated may undertake or continue 

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e m a t t e r o n l y i f t h e d i s q u a l i f i e d l a w y e r i s 

screened from any participation in the matter and is apportioned no 

part of the fee therefrom. 

(c) Except as law may otherwise expressly permit, a lawyer serving as a public officer or employee shall not; 

(1) participate in a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially while in private practice or nongovernmental employment, unless under applicable law no one is, or by lawful 

delegation may be, authorized to act in the lawyer’s stead in the 

matter; or 

(2) negotiate for private employment with any person who is 

involved as a party or as attorney for a party in a matter in which 

the lawyer is participating personally and substantially. 

(d) As used in this Rule, the term “matter” includes; 

(1) any judicial or other proceeding, application, request for a 

ruling or other determination, contract, claim, controversy, investigation, charge, accusation, arrest or other particular matter involving 

a specific party or parties, and 

(2) any other matter covered by the conflict of interest rules of 

the appropriate Government agency. 

(e) As used in this Rule, the term “confidential Governmental 

information”means information which has been obtained under Governmental authority and which, at the time this Rule is applied, the 

Government is prohibited by law from disclosing to the public or 

has a legal privilege not to disclose, and which is not otherwise 

available to the public. 

COMMENT: 

This Rule prevents a lawyer from exploiting public office for the 

advantage of a private client. 

A lawyer representing a Government agency, whether employed 

or specially retained by the Government, is subject to these Rules of 

Professional Conduct, including the prohibition against representing 

adverse interests stated in Rule 1.7 and the protections afforded 

former clients in Rule 1.9. In addition, such a lawyer is subject to 

Rule 1.11 and to statutes and Government regulations regarding 

conflict of interest. Such statutes and regulations may circumscribe 

the extent to which the Government agency may give consent under 

this Rule. 

Where the successive clients are a public agency and a private 

client, the risk exists that power or discretion vested in public 

authority might be used for the special benefit of a private client. A 

lawyer should not be in a position where benefit to a private client 

might affect performance of the lawyer’s professional functions on 

behalf of public authority. Also, unfair advantage could accrue to 

the private client by reason of access to confidential Government 

information about the client or by reason of access to confidential 

G o v e r n m e n t i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e c l i e n t’s a d v e r s a r y o b t a i n a b l e 

only through the lawyer’s Government service. However, the rules 

governing lawyers presently or formerly employed by a Government 

agency should not be so restrictive as to inhibit transfer of employment to and from the Government. The Government has a legitimate 

need to attract qualified lawyers as well as to maintain high ethical 

standards. The provisions for screening and waiver are necessary to 

prevent the disqualification rule from imposing too severe a deterrent against entering public service. 

When the client is an agency of one government, that agency 

should be treated as a private client for purposes of this Rule if the 

lawyer thereafter represents an agency of another government, as 

when a lawyer represents a city and subsequently is employed by a 

federal agency. 

Paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) do not prohibit a lawyer from receiving 

a salary or partnership share established by prior independent agreement. They prohibit directly relating the lawyer’s compensation to 

the fee in the matter in which the lawyer is disqualified. 

Paragraph (a)(2) does not require that a lawyer give notice to the 

Government agency at a time when premature disclosure would 

injure the client; a requirement for premature disclosure might preclude engagement of the lawyer. Such notice is, however, required 

to be given as soon as practicable in order that the Government 

agency will have a reasonable opportunity to ascertain that the 

lawyer is complying with Rule 1.11 and to take appropriate action if 

it believes the lawyer is not complying. 

Paragraph (b) operates only when the lawyer in question has 

knowledge of the information, which means actual knowledge; it 

does not operate with respect to information that merely could be 

imputed to the lawyer. 

CROSS REFERENCES: 

Rule 1.5 Fees 

Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General Rule 

Rule 1.8 Conflict of Interest: Prohibited Transactions 

RULE 1.12 Former Judge or Arbitrator 

(a) Except as stated in paragraph (d), a lawyer shall not represent 

anyone in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated 

personally and substantially as a judge or other adjudicative officer, 

arbitrator, or law clerk to such a person, unless all parties to the 

proceeding consent after disclosure. 

(b) A lawyer shall not negotiate for employment with any person 

who is involved as a party or as attorney for a party in a matter in 

which the lawyer is participating personally and substantially as a 

judge or other adjudicative officer, or arbitrator. A lawyer serving as 

law clerk to a judge, other adjudicative officer, or arbitrator may 

negotiate for employment with a party or attorney involved in a 

matter in which the clerk is participating personally and substantially, but only after the lawyer has notified the judge, other adjudicative officer, or arbitrator. 

(c) If a lawyer is disqualified by paragraph (a), no lawyer in a 

firm with which the lawyer is associated may knowingly undertake 

or continue representation in the matter unless; 

(1) the disqualified lawyer is screened from any participation in 

the matter and is apportioned no part of the fee therefrom. 

(2) written notice is promptly given to the appropriate tribunal to 

enable it to ascertain compliance with the provisions of this Rule. 

(d) An arbitrator selected as a partisan of a party in a multim e m b e r a r b i t r a t i o n p a n e l i s n o t p r o h i b i t e d f r o m s u b s e q u e n t l y 

representing that party. 

COMMENT: 

This Rule generally parallels Rule 1.11. The term “personally and 

AR 27–26 • 1 May 1992 

386 Appendix F 

13 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX G-1: DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE 

USE OF FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE 

DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
 

FOR THE USE OF FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE ON
 

COMALAPA AIR BASE, EL SALVADOR
 

WHEREAS JOINT TASK FORCE (JTF) EAGLE has been formed to provide 

emergency assistance and support to the Government and people of El Salvador 

due to the devastation caused by Hurricane Mitch, 

WHEREAS the Government of El Salvador desires the JTF-Eagle to provide 

relief support throughout El Salvador, and the neighboring nations of Nicaragua 

and Guatemala. 

THEREFORE, the Government of El Salvador will provide to JOINT TASK 

FORCE Eagle at no cost, the following: 

1) Unlimited use of 2700x75 foot runway 18/36 

2) Use of the open grassy fields to the east and west of the runway for parking 

US Military helicopters, 

3) Use of the "Military Ramp" for the loading and off loading of military aircraft; 

and temporary storage of aircraft Materiel Handling Equipment on/or near the 

military ramp, 

4) Use of four built facilities on the Air Base, to wit: one empty barracks building; 

one half of a second facility known as the Mess facility; one-half of the Officer's 

Club facility; and approximately 500 Square Feet in one of the hangers for Office 

space, 

5) Use of the open field to the east of the empty barracks building, including the 

soccer field to locate a tent city, to include a specific area secured for 

communications with up to four 5atellite dish antennas, 

6) Use of the open field to the North of the soccer field (where the water storage 

facility is located) to store materials, equipment and vehicles and potentially 

install covered storage for humanitarian aid, 

7) Use of electrical power, sewage and water connections to the base utility 

systems, including, but not limited to the connections for the tent city, 

Appendix G-1 387 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

8) Security for the protection of property and personnel within JTF-Eagle will be 

provided by the Government of El Salvador, 

9) JTF-Eagle will, at its own expense, be allowed to erect satellite antennas and 

associated communications equipment at the officers club and the facility known 

as the Mess facility. 

It is understood that military personnel within JTF Eagle will not enter without the 

permission of appropriate authorities the following base facilities, to wit: the 

officer housing area, Messing facilities, all Salvadoran airmen barracks, 

operational and storage facilities. 

It is understood that certain facility and real property improvements to support 

TASK FORCE Eagle operations may occur. These improvements will remain to 

benefit all future users of the facilities. 

388 Appendix G-1 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX G-2: SAMPLE LEASE 

Appendix G-2 389
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

390 Appendix G-2
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix G-2 391
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

392 Appendix G-2
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix G-2 393
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

394 Appendix G-2
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

Appendix G-2 395
 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX G-3: SAMPLE PRE-POSITIONING MOU
 

DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
 

BETWEEN THE COMMANDER OF THE BASE FILIPE CRUZ
 

AND THE 219th RED HORSE FLIGHT COMMANDER
 

REGARDING PRE-POSITIONING OF U.S. EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL
 

IN GUATEMALA, BASE FILIPE CRUZ
 

Whereas the United States military has deployed personnel, equipment and 

materials to Guatemala and positioned them at Filipe Cruz Military Base 

(hereinafter called "the Base”) as part of Joint Task Force Aguila, a disaster relief 

operation in response to Hurricane Mitch; 

And whereas Joint Task Force Aguila operations will cease in Guatemala on or 

about 20 January 1999; 

And whereas the United States military will begin New Horizons humanitarian 

assistance operations on or about 25 February 1999 under the command of the 

219th Red Horse Flight Commander (hereinafter "Red Horse Commander"); 

Therefore, the 219th Red Horse Flight Commander has determined that it is the 

United States' best interest to leave certain equipment and material used during 

Joint Task Force Aquila at the Filipe Cruz Military Base in Guatemala so that it 

may be used during New Horizons operations. 

In response to the circumstances described above, commander of the Filipe Cruz 

Guatemalan Military Base (hereinafter "Base Commander”) and the Re-d Horse 

Commander understand as follows: 

1. The Base Commander will permit the Red Horse Commander to store 

equipment and material on the Base from on or about 20 January 1999 to on or 

about 25 February 1999. 

a. The equipment and material are listed on the attached document. 

b. The storage site is located between the Base laundry and the Clinic. 

2. The Base Commander will allow the Red Horse Commander unimpeded 

access to the stored equipment and material. 

3. Subject to prior logistical coordination, the Base Commander will allow the 

Red Horse Commander the right to remove the stored equipment and material 

without restriction on subsequent use. The Red Horse Commander shall have 

396 Appendix G-3 
 

________________________ 

___________________________________________________ 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

the right to remove the equipment without undue delay. The Red Horse 

Commander does not need the Base Commander's approval when deciding 

whether to remove the stored equipment and material. 

4. The Base Commander understands that non-U.S. Military or any civilian force 

can not convert the equipment and stocks to its own use. In other words, the 

legal title to all equipment and stocks remains solely vested in the United States 

Military. 

5. The Base Commander understands that all privileges and immunities enjoyed 

by the U.S. Military will continue to be attached to the stored equipment and 

material and with personnel working with it. These privileges and immunities 

result from any international agreement between Guatemala and the United 

States or any agreement where they have become parties. 

6. The Red Horse Commander understands that the Base Commander bears no 

responsibility for the security of the stored equipment and material, and that the 

Base Commander can not be held liable for it. The Base Commander 

understands that he will ensure the security of the stored equipment and material 

only as far as the Base Commander deems practicable. 

The Base Commander and the Red Horse Commander come to this 

understanding on___ day of January 1999. 

Filipe Cruz Base Commander 

Lieutenant Colonel Gary Schenk, 219th Red Horse Flight Commander 

LIST OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL THAT THE UNITED STATES MILITARY 

WILL STORE ON FELIPE CRUZ MILITARY BASE PER A MEMORANDUM OF 

UNDERSTANDING DATED _____ JANUARY 1999 

1. One DPRS 

2. One Tractor 

3. One ISU 90 

4. One Pick Up Truck 

5. On Bobcat Tractor 

6. 52 UGR Module, Dinner 

7. 52 UGR Module, Breakfast 

8. 234 Cases of MRE 

9. 5,600 Gallons of bottled water (21,200 Liters) 

Appendix G-3 397 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX G-4: MOA CONCERNING THE WORKING RELATIONSHIP 

BETWEEN JTF AGUILA AND SECOND AIR BRIGADE 

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE
 

WORKING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOINT TASK FORCE
 

AGUILA AND THE SECOND AIR BRIGADE
 

1. OBJECTIVE. The objective of this agreement is to facilitate the operational 

coexistence of the Second Air Brigade and Joint Task Force Aguila (JTF-A). This 

agreement is meant to reduce the impact JTF-A's operation will have on the mission 

of the Second Air Brigade. 

2.	 POLICIES. 

a. Command and control. The commanders of JTF-A and the Second Air 

Brigade will maintain control of their respective units. 

b. Support Relations. The Second Brigade will provide JTF-A with the following 

areas, depicted in Annex A, in which it may conduct its mission: 

1.	 Area "A", to the southwest of the officers' club. 

2.	 Area "B", clear area north of hangers 3 and 4 for the billeting of troops 

and storage of various materiel. 

3.	 Area “C”, runway 18/36, for JTF-A air operations. The areas 

immediately to the east and west of the runway may be used for the 

parking of helicopters. 

4.	 Area "D," classrooms southwest corner of hanger 42. 

5.	 Area "E," pavilion #3, north wing of the pavilions. 

6.	 Area "F", north wing of the barracks security group, for troop billeting. 

7.	 Area "G," half of the security group mess hall. 

8.	 Area "H," west of the military ramp. For parking of aircraft, and other 

associated aircraft operations. 

9.	 Area "I, part of hangar #3, availability subject to operational necessities 

of the Second Air Brigade. 

10. Area "J," clear area between the gas station and clinic. 

11. Should JTF-A require more land upon which to conduct its operations, 

coordination of such a requirement will be made through the 

Commander, Second Air Brigade. 

c. Improvements. JTF-A may make what improvements it deems 

necessary to the areas allocated to its use. 

1 . Such improvements will be at no cost to the Second Air Brigade. 

2.	 Such improvements will revert to the Second Air Brigade at no cost. 

3.	 Any improvements that require alteration of the existing 

infrastructure will require the prior permission of Commander, 

Second Air Brigade. 

398	 Appendix G-4 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

4.	 Should JTF-A need to expand its allocated area within the 

Comalapa Air Base, the Commander of JTF-A, or his designee, will 

coordinate JTF-A's requirements with the Second Air Brigade. 

5.	 Headquarters, JTF-A will establish land line communications with 

the Headquarters building of the Second Air Brigade. This is to 

ensure the ability to coordinate issues which may arise 

unexpectedly. 

d. Access to Systems. JTT-A will have access to the Second Air Brigade’s 

electrical power, sewage and water connections. 

e.	 Restricted and Controlled areas. (see Annex B) 

1.	 Restricted areas are described in Annex B. Access to these areas is 

not allowed. These areas include the fueling systems, logistics storage 

area and war stocks magazine. 

2.	 Access to controlled areas, namely the HQ building of the Second Air 

Brigade, will be limited to JTF-A personnel who have business with the 

Second Air Brigade. 

f. Military Ramp. The Second Air Brigade will allow JTF-A to use the military 

ramp for the loading and off loading of military aircraft and the temporary storage of 

aircraft Materiel Handling Equipment. Access to the military ramp will be limited to 

personnel of JTF-A having duties on the ramp, or who are transiting via the ramp. 

g. Air Operations 

1.	 To the extent practicable, flight plans will be coordinated between the 

A-III of the Second Air Brigade and the Air Operations section 

or-JTF-A. 

2.	 The Second Air Brigade and JTF-A will coordinate air operations to the 

extent practicable to avoid interference with each other's missions. 

h. Personnel. JTF-A will make periodic reports to the Second Air Brigade to 

inform the Brigade of how many personnel JTF-A maintains on the Comalapa Air 

Base. 

i. Liaison- MAJ Jose Roberto Pena will act as the liaison officer between the 

Second Air Brigade and JTF-A. JTF-A will appoint a liaison officer. 

Appendix G-4	 399 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX H-1: CLAIMS PROCEDURE MEMORANDUM
 

JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA
 

UNIT 3105
 

APO AA 34023
 

HOC-SJA 25 November, 1998 

MEMORANDUM THRU 

CHIEF OF STAFF, JOINT TASK FORCE EAGLE 

FOR COMMNDER, JOINT TASK FORCE EAGLE 

SUBJECT: Claims Procedures within the JOA 

1. As our operations increase in frequency and volume, the likelihood of our 

personnel having an accident with a host nation person or vehicle increases as 

well. This memo is to present a procedure to handle the claims from host nation 

nationals as a result of those accidents. 

2. The executive agent for the payment of claims is the claims office in USARSO. 

All claims will be adjudicated in USARSO, and payment will be routed into our 

JOA from the USARSO claims office. 

3. For adjudication to take place quickly and fairly, an adequate investigation 

must be conducted into each accident in which our troops our involved. The 

enclosed packet recommends the appointment of a Unit Claims Officer (UCO) in 

each Battalion Sized unit. It will be the duty of the UCO to investigate each 

occurrence that results in a claim or might result in a claim. Guidance on how to 

conduct the investigation is enclosed within the packet. Upon, completion of the 

investigation, the UCO will forward the results of the investigation to JTF-A 

command judge advocate (CJA). It will be the responsibility of the CJA to ensure 

the investigation conforms to the requirements of the USARSO claims office, and 

to forward the results of all investigations appropriately. 

4. Recommend this claims packet be adopted as an SOP within the JOA. 

Recommend further that this packet be distributed to each company sized 

element. Recommend briefing all convoy members. POC is the undersigned at 

DSN- 280-6984, cel 886-5039. 

Encl's: TIERNAN DOLAN 

1. Proposed Claims SOP CPT, JA 

400 Appendix H-1 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

2. Accident SOP Command Judge Advocate 

Appendix H-1 401
 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX H-2: UNIT CLAIMS OFFICER APPOINTMENT GUIDE
 

UNIT CLAIMS OFFICER APPOINTMENT GUIDE 

I. PURPOSE. To provide information regarding the use of Unit Claims 

Officers (UCO's) to investigate and document claims incidents on behalf of 

Foreign Claims Commissions (FCC's) during deployments. 

II. INTRODUCTION. Any deployment of U.S. forces into a foreign country (a 

receiving state) may cause damage to the personnel and property of either the 

U.S. or the receiving state and its inhabitants. Each unit or large convoy appoints 

a UCO to investigate and document every incident that may result in a claim 

against the U.S. 

III. INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENT. 

A. Prompt and thorough investigations will be conducted on all potential and 

actual claims against or in favor of the U.S. government. Information must be 

collected and recorded, whether favorable or adverse. The object of the 

investigation is to gather, with the least possible delay, the best possible 

evidence without accumulating excessive evidence concerning any particular 

fact. 

B. Occasions upon which immediate investigations are required include 

when non-U.S. government equipment is lost or damaged by a U.S. government 

employee, an actual claim is filed, a receiving state national is killed by the act or 

omission of a U.S. government employee, or when competent authority so 

directs. 

IV. APPOINTMENT PROCEDURES. Commanders appoint commissioned 

officers, warrant officers, noncommissioned officers or qualified civilian 

employees as an additional duty. The appointment orders (Enclosure 1) should 

instruct the UCO to coordinate with a designated Judge Advocate or attorney 

who services the UCO's unit. UCO's must seek guidance from servicing JAG 

attorney at the beginning and before the conclusion of the investigation, 

whenever the claim is or may be for more than $2,500. Copies of UCO's 

appointment orders should be forwarded to the appropriate command claims 

service or servicing claims activity. 

V. UCO RESPONSIBILITIES. 

A. UCO's should coordinate with the servicing JAG to learn of particular 

aspects of the mission and receiving state that could cause particular claims 

problems. 

402 Appendix H-2 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

B. UCO's will conduct immediate investigations, scope and duration to 

depend on the claims incident itself. UCO's will often be required to coordinate 

their investigations with criminal or safety investigations, which have priority for 

access to the site and witnesses. Reports of such investigations can be 

extremely useful to UCO's in their own investigations. In certain cases, the 

UCO's themselves may be doing the bulk of investigation, and required to 

safeguard all evidence that may be used in subsequent litigation. To this end, 

UCO's should interview all possible 

witnesses and reduce their statements to writing, secure police reports, hospital 

records, newspaper accounts, etc. Arrange for translation of all documents as 

appropriate. It is not necessary that statements are sworn; claims adjudications 

are administrative matters in which decisions are based upon a preponderance 

of the evidence. UCO's will consult with the servicing JAG before disposing of 

any evidence. 

C. Reports. 

If the incident might have a potential value above $2,500, UCO's complete DA 

Form 1208 and attach all available evidence for review by the responsible FCC 

or Affirmative Claims Authority. Insignificant or simple claims with an actual or 

potential value of less than $2,500 may require only a cover memorandum 

explaining the attachments, if any, and the UCO's findings. The servicing JAG 

can provide guidance as to which form is better. 

2. The factual circumstances surrounding, the claims incident must be detailed 

in the claim report, regardless of the format actually used. In vehicular accidents, 

for example, the questions found at enclosure 2 can be used to develop sufficient 

factual basis by even an unschooled investigator. UCO's should never make 

findings or recommendations as to liability or the dollar value of personal injuries 

in the claims report. These determinations should be left to the responsible judge 

advocate; and if the UCO feels that something must be said in this regard, the 

UCO should document this on a separate document to accompany the claims 

report. 

ENCLOSURES 

1. UNIT CLAIMS OFFICER APPOINTMENT ORDER 

2. INVESTIGATOR'S INTERVIEW CHECKLIST FOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS. 

USE THIS SOP WHENEVER YOU ARE INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT WITH A 

HOST NATION VEHICLE OR DAMAGE CIVILIAN PROPERTY WITH YOUR 

VEHICLE 

1. Assess the danger and threat to you and the convoy. 

Appendix H-2 403 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

2. If circumstances permit, stop your vehicle and signal the convoy to stop. 

3. Contact your unit headquarters immediately and inform them of the situation. 

4. Check for injuries and assess damage if any. 

5. Identify the Host Nation persons involved, specifically the identity of any Host 

Nation injured and the owner of any property damaged. 

6. Record their name, phone number and address. 

7. If possible, get insurance information. 

8. Complete an accident report form when you return to your unit. If time 

permits, enter the basic information into your vehicle log book before leaving 

the accident scene. Basic information should include date, time, location 

(either grid or physical description) and a brief description of what happened. 

9. If you are stopped and the situation is deteriorating, take your vehicle and 

leave the area. 

10.If your vehicle is inoperable due to the accident, secure the vehicle and wait 

for help to arrive. Your vehicle is mission essential property. You may use all 

force necessary to include deadly force to protect the vehicle from theft or 

further damage. 

THIS SOP IN NO WAY CHANGES THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT. YOU MAY 

TAKE ALL NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE ACTION TO DEFEND 

YOURSELF AND YOUR UNIT TO INCLUDE DEADLY FORCE. 

404	 Appendix H-2 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
 

JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA
 

COMALAPA, EL SALVADOR
 

UNIT 3105
 

APO AA 34023
 

HOC-SJA 21 November 1998 

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION 

SUBJECT: Duty Appointment 

1. Effective, 1998, 1 LT Manuel Snuffy, Unit Mailing Address, DSN Phone 

Number, DEROS, is assigned the following duty: 

UNIT CLAIMS OFFICER 

2. Authority: AR 20-27 para. 2-4c 

3. Purpose: As indicated in the applicable directives 

4. Period: Until officially released or relieved from assignment. 

Special Instructions: this memorandum supersedes all previous appointments to 

this assignment. Unit claims officer will coordinate all claims investigations with 

the SJA working in the HQ staff. 

JOHN SMITH 

CPT, IN 

COMMANDING 

Appendix H-2 405 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

INVESTIGATOR'S INTERVIEW CHECKLIST 

1. PERSONNEL INFORMATION 

a. full name 

b. birth date 

c. social security number 

d. unit 

e. home address 

f. ETS date 

g. date eligible to return to home unit (ask about extension) 

h. reporting date at new installation, if applicable 

2. Driving Experience 

a. When did driver start to drive? 

b. When did driver first obtain license? 

c. Type of license? Get copies 

d. Driver's training courses, if any 

e. Accident record, if available 

3. Vehicle Involved in Accident 

a. How familiar was driver with the vehicle? (assigned vehicle? First 

use?) 

b. PMCS records on vehicles 

c. History of any repairs 

d. Any particular problem with vehicle
 

If so, first time problem noticed?
 

4. The Trip 

What were the driver's normal assigned duties 

a. Trip part of these duties? 

b.	 Familiar route? Maps provided if not familiar? 

c. Who authorized trip? 

d. Why was trip authorized 

e. How long, was trip expected to take? 

f.	 How much sleep for driver before assuming duties of driving? 

h. Who else was in vehicle and where were they sitting? 

i. Ask driver to describe trip as it was planned and as it actually 

happened. 

j. Deviations to route? Why? Rest stops? 'Why or why not? 

k. If any stops, why and for how long, 

5. The Accident 

a. If possible visit the accident scene with driven 

b. If possible, take the same route as the driver. 

c. Have driver describe entire sequence leading to accident 

1. When did driver see other vehicle/person 

406	 Appendix H-2 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

2. How fast driving at time 

3. What, if any, evasive actions did driver take 

4. Did other driver see our vehicle 

6. Injuries 

a. Was our driver injured, or any of his passengers? 

b. Names of any other injured parties. (Compare w/ accident report) 

7. Witnesses 

a. Names of any witnesses known to driver 

b. What did witnesses supposedly see? 

c. Any oral statements by witnesses recalled by driver? 

8. Alcohol/drugs 

a. Find out if driver had been drinking anytime during this deployment. 

1. If you suspect the driver had been drinking, advise him of his 

rights under Article 31 of the UCMJ before proceeding with any 

further questions. 

b. Drug use? 

c. Medication? 

1. Name of drug 

2. Get bottle's label if a prescribed medication. 

3. Why was driver taking medication 

4. Affect his driving? 

9. Diagrams 

Show the driver diagrams if available and ask if they are accurate. If not 

accurate, have driver explain why. 

10. Insurance 

a. Consider the following insurance sources, determine if they apply: 

1. Auto Insurance 

a. injured party's own (even if injured party's vehicle not 

involved) 

b. Ower of automobile 

c. Driver of automobile 

2. Homeowner’s insurance 

3. Property insurance 

b. Always get the following information about an insurer: 

1. Full name of company 

2. Address/telephone number of company 

3. Name of adjuster/representative 

4. Amount of claim if one was filed, date filed, and dare of 

payment. 

Appendix H-2	 407 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX H-3: MEMORANDUM ON SOLATIA PAYMENTS
 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

HEADQUARTERS, JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA
 

APO, AA 34023-0008
 

JTFA-C (27-20) 

MEMORANDUM FOR DISTRIBUTION 

SUBJECT: Solatia Payments 

1. Task force commanders are authorized to make solatia payments in an 

amount no greater than $25.00 to local national civilians in the event of an 

incident or accident involving U.S. Forces. Such payments should be used 

sparingly and reserved for situations in which immediate payment is required to 

facilitate the task force mission. Solatia payments are not to be used in lieu of 

claims procedures. 

2. Solatia payments are paid to victims or their families without regard to liability. 

An offering of solatia seeks to convey personal feelings of sympathy or 

condolence to victims. Such feelings do not necessarily derive from legal 

responsibility. Solatia payments are made from operations and maintenance 

funds. Pay agents are authorized to make payments after approval by the 

appropriate task force commander. 

3. Task force commanders must personally approve individual solatia payments. 

This authority cannot be delegated. 

4. Commanders are not relieved of their responsibility to make victims aware of 

the opportunity to file a claim against the United States or of the requirement to 

thoroughly investigate each potential claim. Commanders must immediately 

report potential claims to their respective judge advocates. 

VIRGIL L. PACKETT II 

Colonel, JTF Aguila 

Commanding 

DISTRIBUTION: A 

408 Appendix H-3 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX I: INTENTIONALLY BLANK
 

Appendix I 409
 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX J-1: US SOUTHERN COMMAND POLICY MEMORANDUM, 

CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL BY OPERATIONS FORCES DEPLOYED IN 

SOUTHCOM AOR 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
 

UNITED STATES SOUTHERN COMMAND
 

OFFICE OF THE COMMANDER IN CHEF
 

3511 NW 91 ST AVEN U E
 

MIAMI, FL 33172-1217
 

SCCC 20 March 1998 

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION 

SUBJECT: U.S. Southern Command Policy Memorandum - Consumption 

of Alcohol by Operations Forces Deployed in SOUTHCOM AOR 

1. Purpose. To re-state SOUTHCOM policy of no consumption of alcohol 

by deployed military units performing operational missions or participating 

in exercises under COCOM or OPCON of U.S. Southern Command. 

2. Order. All personnel assigned to units deployed from home station in 

CONUS or Panama will not consume alcohol while on operations or 

exercises in the SOUTHCOM AOR. 

a. Waiver authority: Only SOUTHCOM component commanders, Joint 

Task Force commanders, and commander, SOCSOUTH, may waive this 

restriction with subsequent notification to Headquarters, USSOUTHCOM, ATTN: 

Deputy Commander in Chief. 

b. Exceptions: This restriction does not apply to individuals on 

temporary duty to directly support SOUTHCOM garrison units or to military 

personnel providing direct support to U.S. embassies (specifically to 

include TATS OPGS, CPGS, and JPATS). 

3. Commander's Intent: The intent of this policy is to enhance the security, 

safety, and readiness of small units operating in the high visibility 

political-military environment of Latin America. 

4. Implementation: Alcohol non-consumption policies will be specified in 

USSOUTHCOM and Service component commander deployment orders. 

Commander will include alcohol nonconsumption policies in 

pre-deployment briefings. All alcohol related incidents that occur during 

operations or exercises will be reported by the most expeditious means 

available to USSOUTHCOM (ATTN: SCSJA). 

410 Appendix J-1 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

C. E. WILHELM 

General, U.S. Marine Corps 

Commander in Chief, U.S. Southern 

Command 

DISTRIBUTION: 

D 

Appendix J-1 411 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX J-2: JTF AGUILA COMMANDER’S ORDERS REGARDING THE 

TREATMENT OF CULTURAL OBJECTS 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

HEADQUARTERS. JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA
 

APO. AA 34023-0008
 

11 December 1998 

FOR: All Joint Task Force Aguila Personnel 

SUBJECT- Commander's Orders Regarding the Treatment of Cultural Objects 

1. Applicability: This order is applicable to all U.S. military and DoD civilian personnel 

attached, assigned, or under the operational control of Joint Task Force Aguila 

(JTF-A). 

2. Purpose: This order establishes command policy and regulations concerning the 

conduct of JTF-A personnel within the Joint Operations Area (JOA). Paragraphs 4.a 

and 4.b of this order are punitive, violations of which are punishable under Article 92, 

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), as failure to obey a lawful order. 

3. Background: Cordial relations with our hosts in the JOA remains a top priority. 

JTFA personnel will obey the orders contained in this memorandum to help preserve 

and promote these cordial relations. 

4. Regulations: The following specific orders are issued to JTF-A personnel. 

Commanders will inform every member of their command of these orders. 

a. JTF-A personnel will not possess, remove, buy, sell, deface, or destroy 

cultural objects. Cultural objects are movable or immovable objects that people of 

the host nation consider important to their cultural, national, or historical heritage. 

Examples of cultural objects include: monuments of architecture, works of art, 

manuscripts, books and other objects, that are of artistic, archaeological or historical 

interest. 

b. If JTF-A personnel encounter any cultural object, they will notify their chain 

of command. At the lowest level possible, commanders will notify host nation 

officials. The incident will be reported to the Joint Task Force Commander (CJTF). 

The CJTF will then contact proper host nation authorities regarding the cultural 

object. 

VIRGIL L. PACKETT 11 

Colonel, JTF Aguila 

Commanding 

412 Appendix J-2 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX J-3: JTF AGUILA COMMANDER’S POLICY REGARDING 

MWR ACTIVITIES 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

HEADQUARTERS, JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA
 

APO, AA 34023-0008
 

11 December 1998 

FOR: All Joint Task Force Aguila Personnel 

SUBJECT: Commander's Policy Regarding the MWR Activities 

1. Applicability: This order is applicable to all U.S. military and DoD civilian personnel 

attached, assigned, or under the operational control of Joint Task Force Aguila 

(JTF-A). 

2. Purpose: This order establishes command policy and regulations concerning the 

conduct of JTF-A personnel within the Joint Operations Area (JOA). Paragraphs 4.a 

and 4.b of this order are punitive, violations of which are punishable under Article 92, 

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), as failure to obey a lawful order. 

3. Background: Safe conduct during MWR activities remains a top priority. JTF-A 

personnel will obey the orders contained in this memorandum to help preserve and 

promote safety. 

4. Regulations: The following specific orders are issued to JTF-A personnel. 

Commanders will inform every member of their command of these orders. 

a. Subject to the approval of the JTF-A Commander or those to whom he 

delegates authority, personnel may receive passes for MWR activities within 

designated locations. 

b. While on pass and while involved in MWR activities, JTF-A personnel may 

consume alcohol. However, JTF-A personnel must remember that UCMJ, punitive 

article 134, prohibits returning to duties incapacitated due to intoxication. 

c. Also while on pass and while involved in MWR activities within designated 

areas, JTF-A personnel may patronize businesses that offer gambling IAW host 

nation law. 

VIRGIL L. PACKETT II 

Colonel, JTF Aguila 

Commanding 

Appendix J-3 413 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX J-4: JTF AGUILA GENERAL ORDER #1
 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

HEADQUARTERS. JOINT TASK FORCE - AGUILA
 

BOX # 3105
 

ARO AA 34023-0008
 

REPLY TO A17ENTION OF: 

CJTF-A 06 December 1998 

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION 

SUBJECT: General Order No. 1 

1. TITLE: Prohibited activities of Joint Task Force AGUILA (JTF AGUILA) personnel 

serving in the Joint Operations Area (JOA). 

2. PURPOSE: To prohibit conduct that is to the prejudice of good order and 

discipline of JTF AGUILA, is of a nature likely to bring discredit upon JTF AGUILA, is 

harmful to the health and welfare of members of JTF AGUILA, or is essential to 

preserve US and host nation relations. 

3. APPLICABILITY: This General Order is applicable to all US military personnel 

assigned or attached to JTF AGUILA, and all US civilian personnel serving with, 

employed by, or accompanying forces assigned or attached to JTF AGUILA. This 

General Order supersedes any other General Order previously issued. 

4. AUTHORITY: The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Title 10 United States 

Code, section 801 et. seq. 

5. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES: 

A. Introduction, purchase, possession, use, sale, transfer, manufacture, or 

consumption of any alcoholic beverages. 

B. Swimming in any body of water within the AOR, to include rivers, lakes, 

streams, oceans, swimming pools, or any other body of water. Organized MWR 

activities are exempted from this prohibition. 

C. Traveling outside of any base camp alone. All personnel must travel 

outside base camps in, at minimum, parties of two or more. 

D. Before executing any operation, movement, or routine procedure, a 

documented risk assessment must be performed. Formulation of plans and control 

measures must be implemented to minimize risk. 

414 Appendix J-4 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

6. PUNITIVE ORDER: Paragraph five of this General Order is punitive in nature. 

Persons subject to the UCMJ may be court-martialed or receive adverse 

administrative action, or both, for violations of the General Order. Likewise, civilians 

serving within, employed by, or accompanying JTF Aguila may face criminal 

prosecution or adverse administrative action for violation of this General Order. 

7. USSOUTHCOM standing rules of engagement. as contained in SC Form 166, are 

in effect. 

8. INDIVIDUAL DUTY: All persons subject to this General Order are charged with 

the duty to become familiar with this General Order and local laws and customs. The 

JTF Aguila mission places US Armed Forces and civilian personnel into a country 

whose laws and customs prohibit or restrict certain activities with are generally 

permissible in the United States. All personnel shall avoid action, whether or not 

specifically prohibited by this General Order, which might result in, or reasonably be 

expected to create, the appearance of a violation of this General Order or local law 

or customs. 

9. UNIT COMMANDER RESPONSIBILITIES: Commanders and civilian supervisors 

are charged with ensuring that all personnel are briefed on the prohibitions and 

requirements of this General Order. A "pocket card" accompanies these orders 

which is to be distributed to all troops. Commanders and supervisors are expected to 

exercise good judgment in reinforcing this General Order. 

10. EFFECTIVE DATE: This General Order is effective immediately. 

11. EXPIRATION: This General Order will expire when rescinded by JTF AGUILA or 

higher authority. 

12. WAIVER REQUEST: Requests to waive or modify the prohibitions of this 

General Order should be coordinated with the JTF AGUILA Staff Judge Advocate 

prior to submission to JTF AGUILA for action. 

VIRGIL L. PACKETT II 

Colonel, JTF Aguila 

Commanding 

DISTRIBUTION:
 

All members of JTF Aguila
 

Appendix J-4 415 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX K-1: HURRICANE MITCH MILITARY RESPONSE TIMELINE1 

Mitch’s Timeline 

26 SEP 1998 Mitch became the 4th strongest hurricane ever 

with sustained winds of 180 miles per hour. 

27 OCT 1998 Mitch stalled off of the coast of Honduras 

until evening 29 OCT. 

30 OCT 1998 Mitch moved across El Salvador. 01 NOV 1998 Mitch moved across Guatemala. 

03 NOV 1998 Mitch stalled to a tropical storm and entered 

the southern Gulf of Mexico. Warms waters 

rejuvenated Mitch to Tropical Storm level. 

05 NOV 1998 Mitch hit southern Florida. Mitch “died” 

(became extra-tropical) at 1600 hours Eastern 

Standard Time. 

Military Response Timeline 

28 OCT 1998 Phase I EMERGENCY 

28 OCT 1998 Crisis Response Team Activated 

30 OCT 1998 USCINCSO Warning Order Released 

03 NOV 1998 First US DOD helicopters arrived in Managua, 

Nicaragua. 

05 NOV 1998 USCINCSO Request for Deployment Order (RDO) 

Released 

06 NOV 1998 USCINCSO RDO MOD 1 Released 

06 NOV 1998 USCINCSO RDO MOD 2 Released 

07 NOV 1998 USCINCSO Crisis Action Team (CAT) Activated 

09 NOV 1998 USCINCSO RDO MOD 3 Released 

13 NOV 19998 USCINCSO DJTFAC1

 Deployed to Comalapa, El 

Salvador 

16 NOV 1998 TF-Aguila Activated 

17 NOV 1998 USCINCSO RDO MOD 4 Released 

19 NOV 1998 USCINCSO RDO MOD 5 released 

23 NOV 1998 USCINCSO RDO MOD 6 Released 

25 NOV 1998 USCINCSO RDO MOD 7 Released 

28 NOV 1998 PHASE II REHABILITATION 

04 DEC 1998 USCINCSO USCINCSO DJTFAC Re-deployed 

14 JAN 1999 USCINCSO RDO MOD 8 Released 

21 JAN 1999 USCINCSO RDO MOD 9 Released 

06 FEB 1999 Last Personnel Leave Guatemala 

19 FEB 1998 USCINCSO RDO MOD 10 Released 

1

 Deployable Joint Task Force Augmentation Cell. The DJTFAC consists of about 25-35 specially trained 

staff members. It is a Commander In Chief’s (CINC’s) rapidly deployable nucleus for standing up a Joint 

Task Force (JTF). When the JTF stands up, the DJTFAC dissolves (ceases to exist as an entity), though its 

members stay on with JTF staff. 

416 Appendix K-1 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

20 FEB 1999 CJTF-BRAVO Assumes AOR and JTF-Aguila 

Deactivated 

20 FEB 1999 Phase III RESTORATION 

26 FEB 1999 Crisis Response Team (CAT) Deactivated 

Appendix K-1 417 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX K-2: HURRICANE MITCH US GOVERNMENT 

ORGANIZATIONS TIMELINE 

Mitch’s Timeline
 

26 SEP 1998	 Mitch became the 4th strongest hurricane ever
 

with sustained winds of 180 miles per hour.
 

27 OCT 1998	 Mitch stalled off of the coast of Honduras
 

until evening 29 OCT.
 

30 OCT 1998	 Mitch moved across El Salvador.
 

01 NOV 1998	 Mitch moved across Guatemala.
 

03 NOV 1998	 Mitch stalled to a tropical storm and entered
 

the southern Gulf of Mexico. Warms waters
 

rejuvenated Mitch to Tropical Storm level.
 

05 NOV 1998	 Mitch hit southern Florida. Mitch “died”
 

(became extra-tropical) at 1600 hours Eastern
 

Standard Time.
 

Government Organizations Response Timeline
 

23 OCT 1998	 US Charge d’ Affaires to Costa Rica, Richard
 

L. Baltimore III, declared a disaster due to
 

severe flooding.
 

27 OCT 1998 US Ambassador to Honduras, James F. Creagan,
 

declared a disaster.
 

27 OCT 1998	 USAID/OFDA formed their DART(Disaster
 

Assistance Response Team. The DART was led
 

by OFDA’s Senior Regional Advisor in Costa
 

Rica. Over the 2-month time period from 27
 

OCT – 24 DEC 1998,the following numbers of
 

disaster specialists operated in the named
 

countries:
 

• 15 in Honduras 

• 11 in Nicaragua 

• 5 in Guatemala 

• 4 in El Salvador 

• 4 visited Belize for short period 

27 OCT 1998	 USAID/OFDA/LAC Regional Advisor and
 

consultant arrived in Honduras. More DART
 

members arrived over days following.
 

27 OCT 1998	 USAID/OFDA/LAC consultant arrived in
 

Guatemala.
 

28 OCT 1998	 SOUTHCOM Phase I EMERGENCY
 

29 OCT 1998	 USAID/OFDA/LAC Regional Advisor and three
 

OFDA disaster specialists (DART Team members)
 

arrived in Belize.
 

418	 Appendix K-2 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

29 OCT 1998	 US Ambassador to Nicaragua, Lino Gutierrez,
 

declared a disaster due to the catastrophic
 

flooding.
 

29 OCT 1998	 US Charge d’ Affaires to Belize, Joel Danies,
 

declared a disaster.
 

30 OCT 1998	 DART Team members arrived in Nicaragua.
 

31 OCT 1998	 US Ambassador to Guatemala, Donald J. Planty,
 

declared a disaster.
 

31 OCT 1998	 DART team departed Belize.
 

01 NOV 1998	 US Ambassador to El Salvador declared a
 

disaster.
 

01 NOV 1998	 DART Team member (Miami-Dade disaster
 

specialist) arrived in El Salvador.
 

28 NOV 1998	 SOUTHCOM PHASE II REHABILITATION
 

11 DEC 1998 Last DART member departed El Salvador.
 

11 DEC 1998 Last DART member departed Guatemala.
 

19 DEC 1998 Last DART member departed Nicaragua.
 

20 FEB 1999	 SOUTHCOM Phase III RESTORATION
 

Appendix K-2	 419 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX K-3: JOINT TASK FORCE AGUILA ORGANIZATION
 

JTF AGUILA HQ (593D CSG) (IN EL SALVADOR)
 

1ST POG (PSYOP OPERATIONS GROUP)
 

46TH
 CSG (ABN)(JLC)
 

C2/380TH MVMT CNTRL TM/330TH MCC
 

46TH
 MATERIEL MGMT TM
 

CSSD 69 (HQ) (USMC)
 

PAO TM/1ST COSCOM
 

CONTINGENCY CONTRACTING TM/1ST COSCOM
 

TM 1/129TH POSTAL CO/18TH SSG
 

AG TM/18TH SSG
 

TM1/126 FI DET/18TH SSG
 

SEN TM/93D

 SIG BDE
 

55TH
 MED GRP (JMC)


 86TH MED HOSPITAL (LEVEL III (-) MED FAC)
 

THEATER MED MATERIAL MAN CTR
 

32D MED DISTR CO(-)
 

600 GPH WATER PUR DET (X3)
 

146TH AIR EVAC LIAZON TM
 

JOINT PATIENT MOVEMENT REQ CTR
 

248TH MEDICAL DETACH
 

227TH MEDICAL DETACH (SANI)
 

498TH MED CO (-) (AIR EVAC)
 

(CHPPM) DISEASE SURVEILLANCE TM
 

93RD
 SIGNAL BDE (-) HEAVY COMM PACKAGE
 

JOINT SYS CNTRL CELL
 

2/350 CIVIL AFFAIRS TACTICAL SPT TM
 

HOC (USARSO)
 

(U)TASK FORCE EL SALVADOR (HQ 593D CSG)
 

7-101 AV BN (-)
 

B/7-101 (5 CH-47)
 

A/4-101(-).(3UH-60)
 

1/19TH ASOS MET DETACH
 

621ST AMG TALCE MOG (USAF)
 

CSSD 69 (HQ) (USMC)
 

420 Appendix K-3 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

TASK FORCE NICARAGUA (HQ 36TH EN GRP)
 

(a.k.a. TF BUILD HOPE)
 

46TH
 (CBT HVY) ENG BN
 

63RD
 CSECO
 

55TH
 EN CO (MGB) CO(+)
 

93RD
 SIGNAL DETACH (MEDIUM COMM PACKAGE)
 

96 CIVIAL AFFAIRS TACTICAL SPT TM
 

7-101 AV DETACH
 

B/7-101 (5 CH-47)
 

A/4-101(-).(3UH-60)
 

3/19TH ASOS MET DETACH
 

3/498TH MED PLT(AIR EVAC)
 

C/1-502 INF (-)
 

189TH LTF (CSB) (TACON)
 

SEN TM/93D SIG BDE
 

600 GPH WATER PUR DET 69TH CSSD (USMC)
 

RATION BREAK POINT TM1/18TH QM DET/530TH S&S BN
 

1ST
 SLCR PLT/259TH FLD SVC CO
 

2ND
 WTR TM/364TH QM CO
 

204TH WTR DET/186TH QM CO/530TH S&S BN
 

546TH TRANS CO (-)
 

HQ PLT
 

1 LT TRANS PLT
 

TM 1/MED TRK PLT
 

TM 1 PLS TRK/126TH TC/7TH TRANS BN
 

2 POL PLT/364TH QM CO
 

TM 1/380TH MVMT CNTRL TM/330TH MCC
 

659 MAINT CO (-)
 

HQ PLT
 

BASE SHOP
 

TM 2/129 POSTAL DETACH/18TH SSG
 

AG TM/18TH SSG
 

TM 2/126 FI BN18TH SSG
 

261ST MED BN (-)(TACON)
 

ENTOMOLOGICAL PREV MED DETACH (X2)
 

61ST
 MEDICAL DETACHMENT (SANITATION)
 

NAVY ENVIR PREV MED UNIT #2
 

SPECIAL PSYCHIATRIC RAPID INTERVENTION TEAM
 

1 AND 2/248TH VETERINARY DET
 

IFR EXPEDITIONARY AIR TRAFFIC CENTER DETACH
 

Appendix K-3 421 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

TF GUATEMALA (HQ 819/820 RED HORSE SQD (USAF))
 

819TH/820TH RED HORSE SQD(-)
 

264TH LTF (CSB) (TACON)
 

600 GPH WATER PUR DET (X2)
 

SEN TM/93RD SIG BDE
 

TM 2/380TH MVMT CNTRL TM/330TH MCC
 

364TH QM CO (-)
 

HQ, PLT
 

GEN SUP PLT
 

POL PLT (-)
 

WTR PLT (-)
 

RATION BREAK POINT TM 2/18TH QM DET/530TH S&S BN
 

2ND
 LT TRANS PLT/546TH TC
 

TM 2 PLS TRK/126TH TRANS CO/7TH TRANS BN
 

259TH FLD SVC CO(-)
 

HQ PLT
 

2ND
 SLCR PLT
 

COMPOSITE PLT/659TH MAINT CO/LTF 189 (CSB)
 

TM 2/380TH MVMT CNTRL TM/330TH MCC
 

TM 3/129TH POSTAL DET/18TH SSG
 

TM 3/126TH FINANCE BN
 

C/159 AV DETACHMENT (FT BRAGG NC) (a.k.a. TF ANGEL)
 

(4 CH -47)
 

(6 UH-60)
 

2/498TH MED PLT(AIR EVAC)(3 UH-60)
 

2/19TH ASOS MET DETACH
 

A/2D

 MEDICAL BN (USMC)(TACON)
 

3/248TH VETERINARY DET
 

93RD
 SIGNAL DETACH (MEDIUM COMMUNICATION PACKAGE)
 

1/350 CA TACTICAL SPT TM
 

422 Appendix K-3 
 

JA Organization1 

SOUTHCOM 

Miami FL 

JTF 

Nicaragua 

CPT Walters 

JTF Aguila 

HQS in 

El Salvador 

MAJ Johnson 

JTF B 

Honduras 

CPT Saumur 

JTF 

El Salvador 

CPT Dolan 

1LT Hannig2 

1 Picture as of DEC 1998. It was a month into the operation before 

there was a centralized concept of legal support in the theater. 

2 Duty primarily in El Salvador with travel to and from Guatemala. 

JTF 

Guatemala 

1LT Hannig2 

Appendix K-4 423 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 

APPENDIX K-4: JUDGE ADVOCATE DEPLOYMENT ORGANIZATION 

AND 

TIMELINE 
Army JA Deployment Timeline

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

424 Appendix K-4 

W

A

LT

E

R

S 

R

E

D

EP

L

O

YS 

J

O

HN

S

O

N R

E

D

EP

L

O

YS 

HANN 

I 

G 

R

E

D

EP

L

O

YS 

S 

A 

M 

U R 

J 

T F 

B H 

O 

N 

NOV. DEC. JAN. FEB. 

D

O

L

AN R

E

D

EP

L

O

YS 

28 22 CPT SAUMUR: Was the JTF-B Command JA prior to Mitch. Was replaced by CPT Adrian Henderson in NOV. 

OCT. MAJ JOHNSON: Started with C/159th Aviation Det. From Fort Bragg in Guatemala. Joined the JTF Aguila FEB. 

headquarters in El Salvador as their Command JA two weeks after the JTF was stood up. 

J

O

HN

S

O

N 

I

N 

ES 

HANN 

I

G 

I 

N

ES

W

A

LT

E

R

S 

I

N N 

I

C

H

E

ND

E

R

S

O

N 

J

TF

B H

O

N

D

O

L

AN 

I

N 

ES 

J

O

HN

S

O

N 

I

N 

G

T 

MITCH CPT DOLAN: Was sent by US Army South (USARSO) as a member of the HOC (Humanitarian Ops Cell) in El 

STRIKES Salvador. Was rolled into the JTF when it stood up. 

CPT WALTERS: Deployed with the 36th Engineer Group out of Fort Benning. 1LT HANNIG: Deployed from I Corps, Fort Lewis, in support of its 593d Support Group. 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 

Appendix K-4 425 2x 71Ds SSG Robinson 46th CSG PFC Ruiz 593d (I Corps)CSG 

1x 71D 

SPC VanEkren 

3x 71Ds 

SPC Eaves (46th Eng Bn, FtPolk) SGT Madril Smith (Ft Benning) SGT Wharton (189th CSB, Ft Bragg) 

(JTF B) 

SSG Scott A. Wiltshire 

1x 71D Panama 

SSG Franklin 

71D Organization 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX K-5: JTF AGUILA CJA CONTINUITY FILE
 

Note: Below is the outline, or contents list, for the continuity file created by MAJ 

Dale N. Johnson, the command judge advocate for Task Force Aquila. It is 

included as a reminder that keeping log books and continuity files is critical, as 

an example of the sorts of items that should be included in continuity books and 

files, and because it highlights the types of issues that were faced in this disaster 

relief operation. From this list, only the continuity Checklist for JTF SJA is 

included in this appendix. Other documents listed below may be found as other 

appendices to this book. 

SJA Continuity File 

Table of Contents 

1. Checklist 

2. Points of Contact 

3. New Horizons Legal Support Guidance 

4. ROE/Human Rights Policies and Procedures 

5. Guatemala Mutual Defense Assistance Treaty 

6. Guatemala Proposed DIPNOTE (Diplomatic Note) 

7. Nicaragua DIPNOTE 

8. El Salvador DIPNOTE 

9. El Salvador Health Care Agreement 

10. Honduras Bilateral Military Assistance Agreement 

11. DOD DIR 5530.3—International Agreements 

12. Comalapa (El Salvador) Draft Base Use MOU 

13. San Jose (Guatemala) Draft Base MOU 

14. Invitational Travel Order (Blanket Waiver) 

15. Guatemalan Airborne Operations With US Forces Info. Paper 

16. Free Mail/Unit Funds Info. Paper 

17. US Rations for Host Nation Personnel Legal Opinion 

18. PX Privileges For Host Nation Personnel Legal Opinion 

19. Distribution of Excess Class I Legal Opinion 

426 Appendix K-5 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

20. Compensatory Leave For Deployed Personnel Info. Paper 

21. UCMJ Authority—SC Reg. 27-5 (Extract) 

22. JTF-A UCMJ Withholding Policy 

23. JTF-A General Orders 

24. JTF-A Cultural Objects Policy 

25. JTF-A Operations Safety Policy 

26. JTF-A Comalapa Off-Limits Policy 

27. Simplified Acquisition Threshold for Hurricane Mitch Ops 

28. JTF-A Mgmt./Contracting Guidance 

29. JTF-A Funding FLow 

30. Locally Purchased Awards Legal opinion 

31. Comalapa Air Base Engineer Projects Legal Opinion 

32. Sample Legal Assistance Flyer 

33. Customs Guidance on Cuban Imports 

34. USARSO Claims Processing Guide 

35. JTF-A Claims SOP 

36. Sample Claims Processing Documents 

37. SJA AARs 

Appendix K-5 427 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 

Checklist for JTF SJA 

As of 27 January, 1999 

CK # ACTION 

PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS 

One O-4 operational law attorney at JTF Headquarters; one O-3 

attorney at each subordinate country task force; one O-3 trial defense 

attorney co-located with JTF headquarters; one MOS 71D (E-5 - E-7) 

at JTF Headquarters; one MOS 71D (E-1 - E-4) assigned to each 

attorney. As a last resort, TDS services can be obtained through 

USATDS-USARSO (Panama), DSN: (313)288-3636. 

EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS 

One Pentium laptop computer per attorney with fax modem, CD ROM 

drive, ethernet card, MS Office, Formflow, LAAWS legal assistance 

software; Internet capable, and dial-up e-mail, printer; floppy disks; file 

folders; digital camera; notary seal; file holder; 3-ring binders; stapler; 

staple puller; pens, highliters; pencils; dictionary; calculator; note 

paper; printer paper; JAG Corps Personnel directory; listing of e-mail 

addresses for home station SJA offices and other POCs. 

DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS 

LAAWS (CD ROM); DA Electronic Library, EM OOO1 (CD ROM); AR 

27-10; AR 15-6; AR 735-5; Operational Law Handbook (JA 422); 

MCM; AR 25-50; AR 27-20; 

DA PAM 162; AR 635-200; AR 600-8-24; AR 600-20; AR 600-8-22; 

AR 601-280; 

AR 600-8-2; AR 600-37; AR 190-11; AR 27-26, DODI 5530.3; 

Applicable SOFA and current DIPNOTE for each country; U.S.C. 

sections pertaining to applicable operational fund sources; 

SOUTHCOM REG 27-5; Standing SOUTHCOM ROE; 

SOUTHCOM REG 1-20. 

PREDEPLOYMENT COORDINATION 

1 SJA, U.S. SOUTHCOM, DSN: (312) 567-1304; 

USCSJA@hq.southcom.mil. 

2 SJA, USARSO, DSN: (313) 288-3621; dmccallum@usarsolan1.army.mil. 

3 Obtain phone and e-mail contacts for all other deployed attorneys and 

their SJAs. 

4 Establish Liaison with CLAMO, DSN 934-6339; 

RandoT@hqda.army.mil. 

5 Obtain MILGRP/Embassy legal POC for each country from OSJA, 

U.S. SOUTHCOM. 

6 Obtain funding guidance from the JTF operation executive agent (J8/DCSRM USARSO). 

7 Identify U.S. Code sections pertaining to all applicable fund sources. 

8 Verify that base orders attach all JTF personnel and for administrative 

and UCMJ purposes. 

428 Appendix K-5 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

9 Obtain all applicable treaties and DIPNOTES from OSJA, U.S. 

SOUTHCOM. 

10 Ensure all deployed personnel receive SOUTHCOM mandated ROE 

and Human Rights training. 

DAILY OPERATIONS 

1 Establish daily log of significant activities (DA form 1594). 

2 Establish a filing system by legal function. 

3 Obtain Staff Battle Rhythm 

4 Attend Daily Briefings 

5 Establish daily e-mail or telephonic contact with attorneys in each 

country task force. 

6 Schedule weekly JTF CDR (CG appointment) to discuss private legal 

matters. 

7 Prepare weekly SITREP for U.S. SOUTCOM SJA; cc to USARSO & 

Supporting OSJAs. 

8 Copy all records for historical files. 

INTERNATIONAL LAW 

1 Review Applicable Treaties/DIPNOTES 

1a Guatemala--Mutual Defense Assistance Treaty (TIAS 3283,18 June 

1955); No DIPNOTE. 

1b Nicaragua--DIPNOTE No. 230 (7 NOV 1998). 

1c Honduras--Bilateral Military Assistance Agreement (20 May 1954) w/ 

Protocols I, II, &III (20 May 1985). 

1d El Salvador--DIPNOTE No. 652 (13 NOV 1998); U.S. Personnel 

Health Care Agreement

 (7 NOV 1991). 

2 Draft MOU for host nation base support. 

2a Review DoD Instruction 5530.3 pertaining to international 

agreements. 

2b Coordinate draft with OSJA U.S. SOUTHCOM. 

3 Monitor compliance with host nation and U.S. environmental law. 

4 Obtain host nation tort legal standards for claims from 

MILGRP/Embassy legal POC. 

5 Establish ROE/Human Rights Training Plan. 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 

1 Coordinate with J-3 Air for Blanket Invitational Travel Orders for 

U.S.and Host Nation civilians to travel aboard U.S. Army Aircraft. 

2 Advise AR 15-6 Investigating Officers. 

3 Review legal standards and JTF policy for evacuation of remains from 

JOA. 

4 Review aircraft pre-accident plan for compliance with applicable 

safety regulations. 

MILITARY JUSTICE 

1 CinC, U.S. SOUTHCOM is JTF GCMCA. 

2 JTF CDR is designated SPCMCA & SCMCA over all service 

Appendix K-5 429 
 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

component personnel per U.S. SOUTHCOM REG 27-5, 1 AUG 95, 

para. f. 

3 JTF CDR has Article 15 Authority over all service component 

personnel per U.S. SOUTHCOM REG 27-5, 1 AUG 95, para. f. 

4 Report all UCMJ cases to SJA, U.S. SOUTHCOM, DSN: 567-1305, 

COMM: (305)467-1305. 

5 Establish justice issue reporting system for JOA. 

6 Establish senior NCO/Officer misconduct withholding policy for JOA. 

6a Obtain withholding policies from home stations jurisdictions. 

6b Ensure reporting to home station commanders in accordance with 

local policy. 

7 Ensure subordinate field grade officers administer Article 15 

punishment. 

7a JTF CDR is appellate authority, where possible, to avoid the need to 

forward to CinC U.S. SOUTHCOM on appeal. 

8 Forward LORs to GO for OMPF filings per AR 600-37. 

9 Establish TDS circuit for visits throughout the JOA. 

FISCAL LAW 

1 Read Chapters 11 & 12, Operational Law Handbook (JA 422). 

2 Identify all sources of funding for each phase of task force operations. 

3 Obtain U.S.C. sections pertaining to each fund source. 

4 Obtain MACOM funding guidance for all phases of the operation. 

5 Establish liaison with J-8 and KO. 

6 Review all contractual commitments. 

7 Ensure all funds are expended for proper purpose. 

8 Clarify uncertainties with the contract law department, TJAGSA. 

9 Coordinate legal opinions with the executive agent OSJA (USARSO 

SJA). 

LEGAL ASSISTANCE 

1 Review AR 27-26. 

2 Pass all justice issues to TDS counsel. 

3 Ensure will and POA software is available. 

4 Publicize availability of services. 

CLAIMS 

1 Obtain FCC appointment orders from USARSO, Claims, DSN: (313) 

288-3610, pkey@usarso-lan1.army.mil. 

2 Identify a pay agent funded with claims funds. 

3 Ensure each unit appoints a unit claims representative. 

4 Distribute claims SOP including investigation instructions and POCs 

to each unit claims rep. 

5 Ensure each JTF vehicle is equipped with a (Spanish translation) 

instruction memorandum to be given to potential claimants. 

6 Collect potential claims information from unit claims representative. 

6a Ensure potential claimant understands the claims filing process. 

7 Process Claims. 

430 Appendix K-5 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

7a Obtain SF 95 from claimant. 

7b FAX completed SF 95 to USARSO Claims, DSN: (313) 288-3610. 

7c Provide claimant acknowledgement letter. 

7d Obtain investigation and associated documents. 

7e Determine host nation legal standards. 

7f Adjudicate claim. 

7g Complete Small Claims Certificate (DA Form 1668)--Under $1,000; or 

7 paragraph memorandum--Over $1,000. 

7h Complete Settlement Agreement and Payment Report in lieu of DA 

Form 1666. 

7I Complete SF 1034 and provide to pay agent for payment. 

8 Copy all claims files. 

9 Forward completed claims to USARSO, Claims. 

10 Maintain JOA Claims tracking chart. 

11 Develop JTF Solatia payment policy. 

POC for this document: 

MAJ Dale Johnson 

HQ, XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Bragg 

Fort Bragg, N.C. 28307-5000 

Johnsod1@bragg.army.mil; djscout@hotmail.com 

COMM: (910) 396-4113/2405/2511 (X-112); DSN: 236-4113/2405 

Appendix K-5 431 
 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX L-1: RESERVE UNITS PROVIDING LIFT CAPABILITY
 

1 PHASE I - RESERVE UNITS PROVIDING LIFT CAPABILITY WERE:

Air Force Reserve: 

94th Airlift Wing, Atlanta, GA 

302nd Airlift Wing, Colorado Springs, CO 

349th Air Mobility Wing, Travis AFB, CA 

403rd Airlift Wing, Biloxi, MS 

437th Airlift Wing, Chicopee, MA 

439th Airlift Wing, Springfield, MA 

440th Airlift Wing, Milwaukee, WI. 

443rd Airlift Wing, San Antonio, TX 

445th Airlift Wing, Dayton, OH 

446th Airlift Wing, Tacoma, WA 

452nd Airlift Wing, Riverside, CA 

459th Airlift Wing, Camp Springs, MD 

514th Air Mobility Wing, McGuire Air Force Base, NJ 

910th Airlift Wing, Youngstown, OH 

914th Airlift Wing, Niagara Falls, NY 

934th Airlift Wing, Minneapolis, MN 

Air National Guard: 

117th Air Refueling Wg, Birmingham, AL 

137th Airlift Wing, Oklahoma City, OK 

143rd Airlift Wing, Providence, RI 

146th Airlift Wing, Point Mugu, CA 

159th Fighter Wing, New Orleans, LA 

165th Airlift Wing, Savannah, GA 

167th Airlift Wing, Martinsburg, WV 

172nd Airlift Wing, Jackson, MS 

189th Airlift Wing, Little Rock AR 

Navy and Marine Corps Reserve: 

Naval Air Reserve Fleet Logistics Support Squadron 53, Camp Springs, 

MD 

Naval Air Reserve Fleet Logistics Support Squadron 54, New Orleans, LA 

Naval Air Reserve Fleet Logistics Support Squadron 62, Brunswick, ME 

Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 452, Marine Aircraft Group 49, 

4th Marine Aircraft Wing, Newburgh, NY 

1 DoD News Briefing, Wednesday, November 25, 1998, Defense Link-US Department of Defense, 

“Department of Defense Ships Aid for Central America.” 

432 Appendix L-1 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX L-2: NEW HORIZONS (CENTRAL AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN) 

(19 AUGUST 1999) FY 99 WRAP-UP1 

1. Number of Exercises: 7 

2. Countries: Dominican Republic (DR), Honduras (HO), El Salvador (ES), 

Guatemala (GT) and Nicaragua (NU) 

a. ARNG Leads: NH99(HO)-01, NH99(HO)-02, NH99(DR) and NH99(NU) 

b. USAR Leads: NH99(GT)-01, NH99(GT)-02 and NH99(ES) 

(1) Guatemala - the lead unit: 983d Engineer Group (OH) 

(2) El Salvador - lead unit: 844th Engineer Group (TN) 

467th Engineer Battalion (TN) 

c. Forward Command Element: 117-person command and control 

headquarters at Soto Cano AB, designed to administer exercises in El 

Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua. Reports directly to CNCSOUTH. 

Commanded by an ARNG general officer. Deputy commander provided 

by USAR. Remaining positions filled by ARNG, USAR and ANG soldiers 

and airmen. 

3. ARNG Forces: 

a. Total Number of States Involved: 1 

b.	 Total Number of ARNG Units: 126 

(1) ARNG Engineer Battalions:	 11 

c. Total Number of ARNG Soldiers: 12,560 

d. ARNG Daily Average Deployed: 1,700 

4. USAR Forces: 

a.	 Total Number of USAR Units: 110 

(1) USAR Engineer Battalions: 7 

b.	 Total Number of USAR Soldiers: 7,700 

c. USAR Daily Average Deployed: 700 

5. Other US Participation: 

a. USAF, ANG and AFRC: 981 

b. Navy:	 56 

c. USMC:	 830
 

Total US Forces Participating: 20,340
 

6. Exercise Scope: 

a. Vertical: 33 schools, 11 clinics, 25 wells 

b. Horizontal: 52 road/bridge projects. 208km of roadway re-opened 

Appendix L-2	 433 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX L-3: NEW HORIZONS HONDURAS-01 (NH99HO-01, 13 FEB – 

8 MAY 1999) – JTF SULA1 

ARNG Forces: 

1. Exercise Location: Near El Progresso, Honduras 

2. Exercise Designation: NH99(HO)-01 

3. Construction Rotations: Six company-size engineer rotations 

4. Exercise Active Dates: 1 Jan - 20 Jun 99 

5.	 Task Force Commander: LTC Clay Lassiter, MSARNG, EN (Title 10 AGR) 

(Deputy Commander, Exercise Support Command, USARSO) 

6. Lead States: South Carolina & Mississippi 

7. Total Number of States Involved: 22 

8.	 Total Number of ARNG Units: 25 

9.	 Total Number of ARNG Soldiers: 2,782 

USAR Forces: 

1.	 Army Reserve (SOCOM): 

a. Civil Affairs 13 

b. PSYOPS	 13 

Other US Participation: 

1. Air Force Reserve Civil Eng.Squadrons 

2. Red Horse Engineers: 421 

Total US Forces Participating: 3,229 

Daily Average Footprint: 450 

Allied Nation Participation: 

1. Honduran Infantry 

a. security forces:	 37 

b. engineers:	 19 

Exercise Scope: 

1. Vertical: Construct four schools, three clinics and one latrine. 

2. Drill four water wells, one bridge, and conduct three Medical Readiness 

Training Exercises (MEDRETE). 

434	 Appendix L-3 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

ARNG States/Units: Soldiers 

Alabama 1,087
 

122 ASG 832
 

167 ASG 45
 

231 MP Bn 210
 

Arizona 6
 

123 PA Det 6
 

California 11
 

223 MI Bn 11
 

Illinois 6
 

139 PA Det 6
 

Maryland 5
 

29 PA Det 5
 

Minnesota 35
 

134 Med Bn (MEDRETE) 35
 

Mississippi 557
 

367 CS Co 1
 

890 EN Bn 556
 

New Hampshire 6
 

114 PA Det 6
 

New Jersey 58
 

50 CS 58
 

New York 102
 

3-142 AV Det 102
 

Oklahoma 65
 

700 CS Bn 65
 

Pennsylvania 6
 

109 PA Det 6
 

Puerto Rico 35
 

192 Med Bn (MEDRETE) 35
 

South Carolina 641
 

111 Sig Bn 87
 

122 EN Bn 528
 

265 QM Co 26
 

Tennessee 134
 

771 CS Co 118
 

Utah 19
 

141 MI Bn 19
 

Washington 3
 

341 MI Bn 3
 

West Virginia 6
 

196 PA Det 6
 

USAR Units:
 

431 CA Co (AR) 13
 

Appendix L-3 435 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

10th PSYOPS (MO) 13
 

AFRC Units: 

452 CES (CA) 230
 

910 CES (OH) 55
 

913 CES (PA) 55
 

439 CES (MA) 55
 

307 Red Horse (TX/LA) 26
 

436 Appendix L-3
 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX L-4: NEW HORIZONS HONDURAS-02 (NH99HO-02, 21 FEB – 

8 AUG 1999) – JTF AGUAN ARROW1 

ARNG Forces: 

1. Exercise Location: Coyoles, Honduras 

2. Exercise Designation: NH99(HO)-02 

3. Construction Rotations: 12 company-size engineer rotations from 21 Feb-8 

Aug 99 

4. Exercise Active Dates: 30 Jan - 22 Jun 99 

5. Task Force Commander: LTC Layton, MOARNG, EN (Title 32 AGR) 

(Commander, Camp Clark and Crowder Training Facilities) 

6. Lead States: Louisiana & Missouri 

7. Total Number of States Involved: 12 

8. Total Number of ARNG Units: 30 

9. Total Number of ARNG Soldiers: 3,902 

ANG Forces: 

1. Civil Engineering and Comms. Squadrons 447 

USAR Forces: 

1. Army Reserve (SOCOM): 

a. Civil Affairs 60 

Other US Participation: 

Total US Forces Participating: 4,464 

Daily Average Footprint: 550 

Allied Nation Participation: 

1. Honduran Infantry 

b. security forces & engineers: 50 

Exercise Scope: 

1. Horizontal: Repair or reconstruct three bridges, nine culvert crossings, and 

other repairs over 185km of roadway. Drill five water wells. 

2. Vertical: Build two schools and two clinics and conduct four Medical 

Readiness Training Exercises (MEDRETE) 

Appendix L-4 437 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

ARNG States/Units: Soldiers 

Alabama 60 

168 EN Co 60 

Arizona 224 

258 EN Co 135 

855 MP Co 99 

Connecticut 12 

247 EN Det 12 

Illinois 35 

205 ASMB 35 

Iowa 35 

334 CS Bn (MEDRETE) 35 

Louisiana 1,681 

A/111 ASMB 155 

1-244 AV Bn 114 

3671 CS Co 77 

199 CS Bn 36 

773 CS Bn 50 

205 EN Bn 280 

527 EN Bn 140 

528 EN Bn 140 

769 EN Bn 280 

225 EN Gp 30 

239 MP Co 99 

1086 TC Co 48 

Troop Command 72 

Massachusetts 50 

180 EN Det 50 

Missouri 1,305 

205 ASMB 35 

735 MSB 50 

235 EN Det 50 

220 EN Co 135 

110 EN Bn 270 

203 EN Bn 420 

1140 EN Bn 140 

135 EN Gp 30 

1137 MP Co 40 

1139 MP Co 40 

2175 MP Co 80 

Nebraska 413 

67 CS Bn 413 

North Dakota 20 

164 QM Det 20 

Texas 60 

438 Appendix L-4 
LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

111 MD BN 60
 

Utah 85
 

117 EN Det 50
 

19 SFG 35
 

Wisconsin 6
 

132 CS Bn 6
 

ANG States/Units: Airmen 

Louisiana
 

236 CBCS 202
 

Missouri
 

Wyoming
 

Others:
 

159 MDS 35
 

239 CBCS 70
 

153 CES 30
 

122 CES 30
 

129 CES 30
 

150 CES 30
 

202 RHS 10
 

203 RHS 10
 

Appendix L-4 439 
 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX L-5: NEW HORIZONS DOMINICAN REPUBLIC-02 (NH99DR02, 2 APR – 6 AUG 1999) – JTF CARIBBEAN CASTLE1 

ARNG Forces: 

1. Exercise Location: vic. Monte Plata, DR 

2. Exercise Designation: NH99(DR) 

3. Construction Rotations: 9 company-size engineer rotations from 3 Apr – 6 

Aug 99 

4. Exercise Active Dates: 1 Mar - 20 Aug 99 

5. Task Force Commander: LTC Ed Sweeney, ALARNG, EN (Title 32 AGR) 

(Commander, 1343 EN Bn) 

6. Lead State: Alabama 

7. Total Number of States Involved: 12
 

8. Total Number of ARNG Units: 29
 

9. Total Number of ARNG Soldiers: 2,804 

USAR Forces: 

1. USAR Civil Affairs 

US Marine Corps Reserve: 

1. Engineers 

Other US Participation: 

1. MEDRETE 

2. 56 Sig Bn 45
 

Total US Forces Participating: 3,044
 

Average Daily Footprint: 400
 

Allied Nation Participation: 

1. Dominican Armed Forces (security forces) 30
 

Exercise Scope: 

1. Vertical: Construct eight schools, replace a bridge and conduct three Medical 

Readiness Training Exercises (MEDRETE) 

440 Appendix L-5
 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

ARNG States/Units: Soldiers
 

Alabama 1,366
 

131 AV Bn 125
 

1133 Med Co (AA) 72
 

167 COSCOM 25
 

186 CSE 135
 

200 EN Bn 30
 

877 EN Bn 480
 

1203 EN Bn 54
 

1343 EN Bn 480
 

1169 EN Gp 62
 

231 MP Bn 9
 

20 SFG 4
 

62nd Troop Command 12
 

Arizona 52
 

C/111 ASMB 52
 

California 33
 

649 MP Co 33
 

Connecticut 222
 

242 EN Bn 90
 

143 MP Co 132
 

Delaware 81
 

945 CS Co 13
 

198 Med Co (MEDRETE) 35
 

153 MP Co 33
 

Georgia 480
 

878 EN Bn 480
 

Kansas 50
 

170 CS Co 13
 

995 CS Co 13
 

174 CS BN 24
 

North Dakota 54
 

136 QM Co 54
 

South Carolina 110
 

228 SC BDE 110
 

South Dakota 64
 

1742 TC Co 64
 

Virginia 40
 

229 MP Co 40
 

Wisconsin 130
 

32 MP Co 64
 

132 CS Bn 64
 

USAR Units:
 

350 CA BDE (Florida) 10
 

Appendix L-5 441 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

MARFORRES: 

6 ESB, 4 FSSG (Michigan) 200 

4 Med Bn, 4 FSSG (California) 15 

4 Dental Bn, 4 FSSG (Georgia) 15 

Det 4, CA Gp, (Washington DC) 10 

442 Appendix L-5 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX L-6: NEW HORIZONS NICARAGUA (NH99NU, 17 APR – 4 

SEP 1999) – JTF ESTELI1 

ARNG Forces: 

1. Exercise Location: vic. Esteli’ 

2. Exercise Designation: NH99(NU) 

3. Construction Rotations: 6 company-size engineer Rotations from 29 May – 

21Aug 99 

4. Exercise Active Dates: 17 Apr - 4 Sep 99 

5. Task Force Commander: LTC Alan Rogers, OHARNG (Commander, 216th 

EN Bn) 

6. Lead State: Ohio 

7. Total Number of States Involved: 7 

8. Total Number of ARNG Units: 15 

9. Total Number of ARNG Soldiers: 2,050 

ANG Forces: 

1. Civil Engineers 

USAR Forces: 

1. CA 

2. Medical 

US Marine Corps Reserves: 

1. Engineers 

Other US Participation: 

1. 256 Signal Co 108 

Total US Forces Participating: 2,400 

Average Daily Footprint: 438 

Allied Nation Participation: 

1. Nicaraguan Armed Forces (security forces) 

Exercise Scope: 

1. Vertical: Construct three schools, three clinics. Drill four wells and conduct 

five Medical Readiness Training Exercises (MEDRETE) 

Appendix L-6 443 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

ARNG States/Units: Soldiers 

Alabama 1,366 

Florida 32 

743 Maint Co 20 

Det 3, STARC (MED) 11 

Illinois 36 

Mississippi 507 

223 EN Bn 507 

Montana 22 

Det 3, STARC (MED) 22 

Ohio 738 

216 EN Bn 357 

372 Maint Co 49 

135 MP Co 188 

641 QM Det 36 

1485 Trans Co 98 

STARC-OH 8 

Pennsylvania 389 

328 FSB 389 

Puerto Rico 151 

D/3-142 AV 151 

Composite: 

AA Co (Various Sts) 12 

Medical Company 52 

ANG States/Units: Airmen 

California 

144 CES 30 

Nevada 

890 RHS 52 

Oregon 

142 CES 31 

USAR Units: 

445 CHS and various others (FL) 175 

Civil Affairs 32 

MARFORRES: 

6 ESB, 4 FSSG (OR) 150 

CSS Det, 4 FSSG (Composite) 123 

Det 4, CA Gp, (Washington DC) 10 

444 Appendix L-6 
 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX L-7: FORWARD COMMAND ELEMENT (FCE) (15 MAR – 29 

SEP 1999) 1 

1. Command Post Location: Soto Cano AB, Honduras 

2. Element Designation: FCE 

3. Mission: Commands and controls Expanded NEW HORIZONS 

Exercises in Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua 

4. Element Active Dates: 15 Mar - 29 Sep 99 

5. FCE Commander: BG James Caldwell, OHARNG, (Deputy STARC 

Commander) 

6. Lead: Joint RC Command 

7. Total Number of States Involved: 26 (incl. Puerto Rico) 

8. Total US Forces Participating: 92 

a. ARNG: 58 

b. USAR: 28 

c. USA: 2 

d. Other US Participation: 

(1) USNR 1 

(2) Civilian 3 

9. Allied Nation Participation: N/A 

10.Average Expected Daily Footprint: 92 

Appendix L-7 445 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX L-8: OHIO NATIONAL GUARD JUDGE ADVOCATE 

ROTATIONS1 

Rotation# Period JAG Officer & Business Telephone Number 

1 May 29 – Jun 12 MAJ Jesse Green 

937-547-7380 

2 Jun 12 – Jun 26 None 

3 Jun 26 – Jul 10 COL John Brant 

614-644-2613 

4 Jul 10 – Jul 24 MAJ James Grey Wolf 

513-621-9018 

1LT Sean Devillers 

614-431-4900 

5 Jul 24 – Aug 7 COL Thomas G. Schumacher 

606-384-7709 

6 Aug 7 – Aug 21 LTC Bill Cooper 

937-548-1157 

446 Appendix L-8
 
 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX L-9: INFORMATION PAPER, ARNG PARTICIPATION IN NEW 

HORIZONS (23 MARCH 1999) 

INFORMATION PAPER
 

23 March 1999 

NGB-ARO-Y 

SUBJECT: ARNG Participation in NEW HORIZONS 

1. Background: Two Reserve Component Nuevos Horizontes (NH Exercises--­

English translation "New Horizons") were originally scheduled in Central America 

and the Caribbean for FY99 prior to Hurricanes Mitch and Georges. The two, an 

ARNG-led exercise in Honduras (NH99 Honduras) and an USAR-led exercise in 

Guatemala (NH99 Guatemala). After the environmental catastrophe caused by 

the hurricanes, CINCSOUTH (GEN Wilhelm), responded quickly with disaster 

relief efforts by the AC followed on by a seamless transition from AC forces to a 

"robusted" NH exercise plan----adding five new exercises and a Forward Control 

Element. 

2. Overview. ARNG is leading four major exercises and a General Officer-led 

Forward Command Element and providing helicopter support to 3 USAR led 

exercises. These exercises provide annual training for 13,100 ARNG soldiers 

from 37 States/Territories and the District of Columbia. Incidental to the training 

is the construction of 16 schools, 8 clinics, 16 wells, 15 bridges/culverts, 

approximately 175 km road repairs, and 16 medical exercises. Training benefits 

derived from the conduct of these events directly improve the readiness of our 

engineers, logisticians, communicators, military police, transportation elements, 

aviators, medical personnel, linguists, as well as providing a valuable tool to 

exercise the mobilization capabilities of the STARC staffs and CONUSAs. 

a. NH99-1 Honduras (NH99HO-01). This is the original exercise that was 

previously planned for execution (planned over an 18-month window). This 

exercise was relocated, from an area not effected by Hurricane Mitch, into the 

devastated Sula Valley, hence the task force name: JTF Sula. The bulk of the 

soldiers come from 25 ARNG units from 18 states with the majority of the 

soldiers from South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi. Their mission is to 

construct four schools, three clinics, one public latrine, four wells, conduct 3 

medical exercises, and road improvements within their operational area. 

NH99HO-01 will directly train nearly 3,000 ARNG soldiers. There are currently 

467 deployed with the Task Force, of which 345 are ARNG, six are USAR, eight 

are Active Army, 57 are Air Force Reserve, and 51 Host Nation. The exercise 

execution phase is from 13 Feb thru 8 May, with redeployment completed 20 

June. 

Appendix L-9 447 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

b. NH99-2 Honduras (NH99HO-02). This was the CINCs highest priority 

add-on exercise (termed 'enhanced' New Horizons). This exercise was 

conceived, planned, and launched in less than 60 days in response to GEN 

Wilhelm's request for a 'seamless transition'. Louisiana and Missouri were 

selected to lead this critical effort because of their recent and vast experience in 

the region. This Task Force is centered in the Aguan River valley, one of the 

hardest hit areas within Honduras. Mission focus is repair or reconstruction of 

five bridges, nine culvert crossings, and 125km of road repair, as well as 

constructing two schools, two clinics, six wells, and conducting three medical 

exercises. NH99HO-02 will directly train nearly 4,000 ARNG soldiers. There are 

currently 493 deployed with the Task Force, of which 422 are ARNG, and 71 are 

ANG. The exercise execution phase is from 21 Feb thru 8 Aug, with 

redeployment completed by 22 Aug. 

c. NH99-2 Dominican Republic (NH99DR). This exercise was requested 

by GEN Wilhelm in response to the effects of Hurricane Georges. This exercise 

was conceived, planned, and launched in 100 days and is currently in the 

deployment/base camp construction phase. Alabama was selected to lead this 

effort. Mission focus is vertical construction of eight schools, replacement of a 

bridge, and the conduct of three medical exercises. The ARNG will be 

augmented by a Engineer Battalion from the USMC-R for the bridge project. 

NH99DR will directly train nearly 3,000 ARNG soldiers. There are currently 107 

ARNG soldiers deployed with this task force. The exercise deployment phase 

will be completed by 2 Apr, with the execution phase is from 3 Apr - 6 Aug, with 

redeployment completed by 20 Aug. 

d. NH99-2 Nicaragua (NH99NU). This exercise was originally scheduled 

to be supported by an Active Component element. The requirement shifted to 

the Reserve Component mid-February. The Ohio ARNG has accepted the lead 

State role, with the first significant planning event held last weekend at the 

Professional Education Center involving planners from the Task Force 

Command, the Ohio STARC, NGB, FORSCOM, 1st Army, USARSO, with lateral 

support from Missouri. The Initial Planning Conference, to include the unit level 

will be held this week in Columbus, Ohio. An assessment team comprised of 

engineer and contracting personnel from USARSO, OH, and MS were in 

Nicaragua last week to conduct a preliminary survey of construction sites and 

transit points. The ARNG will be augmented by an Engineer Battalion from the 

USMC-R for horizontal efforts, and is scheduled to construct two schools, three 

clinics, six wells, and conduct as many as seven medical training exercises. This 

exercise will provide training for 2,300 ARNG soldiers. The deployment phase 

will begin as soon as practicable, with the 1st construction rotation anticipated to 

be on the ground by the 29th of May. The exercise will conclude by late August, 

with redeployment from Nicaragua completed by 15 September. 

448 Appendix L-9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

e. Forward Command Element. This command cell was requested by 

GEN Wilhelm to meet the increased need for oversight in the Central American 

region due to the number and complexity of the exercises being conducted. The 

Ohio ARNG has the lead on this effort, and has provided the FCE Commander, 

BG James Caldwell. The task force deployed on 13 March (via ANG C-130) and 

is currently operational at Soto Cano AB, Honduras. The FCE provides 

command and control for two USAR-led exercises in Guatemala, one USAR-led 

exercise in El Salvador, and the ARNG-led exercise in Nicaragua. The focus for 

this element is sustained C2 over the ongoing exercises. Embedded within the 

FCE will be an Army aviation section with fixed wing capability (C-23). Staffing 

for the FCE is split between the Reserve Components. There are currently 70 

deployed with the FCE, of which 43 are ARNG, 26 are USAR, and one Naval 

Reserve. The FCE will be operational 13 March through 1 September, with 

redeployment to be completed by 20 September. 

f. ARNG Helicopter Support. The ARNG is also providing helicopter 

support to two USAR-led exercises in Guatemala (6 UH-60 helicopters and 

crews) and one USAR-led exercise in El Salvador (3 UH-1 helicopters and 

crews). 

3. Funding for New Horizons Exercises. 

a. Pay and Allowances. Soldiers who rotate through the exercises will be 

paid by normal, statutory Annual Training funds. Duration staff elements are 

being paid from T10 ADSW short-tour funding. Because the duration staff 

requirements are additive requirements and were not originally funded for FY99, 

Army has submitted a request for supplemental funding for $7.3 million dollars to 

reimburse the ARNG for these activities. 

b. All Operations and Maintenance funding for transportation, building 

materials, and incremental costs for preparation, deployment, redeployment, and 

reconstitution come from sources external to the ARNG. 

LTC James Kish/NGB-ARO-Y/703-607-9313 

kishj@ngb-arng.ngb.army.mil 

Approved by:_________________________ 

Appendix L-9 449 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

APPENDIX L-10: INFORMATION PAPER, ARNG PARTICIPATION IN NEW 

HORIZONS (3 APRIL 1999) 

INFORMATION PAPER
 

2 April 1999 

NGB-ARO-Y 

SUBJECT: ARNG Participation in NEW HORIZONS 

1. Background: Two Reserve Component Nuevos Horizontes (NH Exercises--­

English translation "New Horizons") were originally scheduled in Central America 

and the Caribbean for FY99 prior to Hurricanes Mitch and Georges. The two, an 

ARNG-led exercise in Honduras (NH99 Honduras) and an USAR-led exercise in 

Guatemala (NH99 Guatemala). After the environmental catastrophe caused by 

the hurricanes, CINCSOUTH (GEN Wilhelm), responded quickly with disaster 

relief efforts by the AC followed on by a seamless transition from AC forces to a 

"robusted" NH exercise plan—adding five new exercises and a Forward Control 

Element. 

2. Overview. ARNG is leading four major exercises and a General Officer-led 

Forward Command Element and providing helicopter support to three USAR led 

exercises. These exercises provide annual training for 13,100 ARNG soldiers 

from 37 States/Territories and the District of Columbia. Incidental to the training 

is the construction of 16 schools, eight clinics, 16 wells, 15 bridges/culverts, 

approximately 175km road repairs, and 16 medical exercises. Training benefits 

derived from the conduct of these events directly improve the readiness of our 

engineers, logisticians, communicators, military police, transportation elements, 

aviators, medical personnel, linguists, as well as providing a valuable tool to 

exercise the mobilization capabilities of the STARC staffs and CONUSAs. 

a. NH99-1 Honduras (NH99HO-01). This is the original exercise that was 

previously planned for execution (planned over an 18-month window). This 

exercise was relocated, from an area not effected by Hurricane Mitch, into the 

devastated Sula Valley, hence the task force name: JTF Sula. The bulk of the 

soldiers come from 25 ARNG units from 18 states with the majority of the 

soldiers from South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi. Their mission is to 

construct four schools, three clinics, one public latrine, four wells, conduct three 

medical exercises, and road improvements within their operational area. 

NH99HO-01 will directly train nearly 3,000 ARNG soldiers. The exercise 

execution phase is from 13 Feb thru 8 May, with redeployment completed 20 

June. The 890th EN Bn (MSARNG), arrives Saturday for the sixth and final 

rotation. A total of 345 personnel are deployed today. 

450 Appendix L-10 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

b. NH99-2 Honduras (NH99HO-02). This was the CINCs highest priority 

add-on exercise (termed 'enhanced' New Horizons). This exercise was 

conceived, planned, and launched in less than 60 days in response to GEN 

Wilhelm's request for a 'seamless transition'. Louisiana and Missouri were 

selected to lead this critical effort because of their recent and vast experience in 

the region. This Task Force is centered in the Aguan River valley, one of the 

hardest hit areas within Honduras. Mission focus is repair or reconstruction of 

five bridges, nine culvert crossings, and 125km of road repair, as well as 

constructing two schools, two clinics, six wells, and conducting three medical 

exercises. NH99HO-02 will directly train nearly 4,000 ARNG soldiers. The 

exercise execution phase is from 21 Feb thru 8 Aug, with redeployment 

completed by 22 Aug. The 205th EN Bn (LAARNG) and the 220th EN Co 

(Combat Support Equipment) is on the ground in Honduras for the fifth of 12 

rotations. Today, 454 personnel are deployed. 

c. NH99-2 Dominican Republic (NH99DR). in response to the effects of 

Hurricane Georges, GEN Wilhelm requested this exercise. This exercise was 

conceived, planned, and launched in 100 days and is currently in the 

deployment/base camp construction phase. Alabama was selected to lead this 

effort. Mission focus is vertical construction of eight schools, replacement of a 

bridge, and the conduct of three medical exercises. The ARNG will be 

augmented by a Engineer Battalion from the USMC-R for the bridge project. 

NH99DR will directly train nearly 3,000 ARNG soldiers. The exercise deployment 

phase will be completed by 3 Apr, with the execution phase from 3 Apr - 6 Aug, 

with redeployment completed by 20 Aug. The second of nine construction 

rotations is on the ground now (877th EN Bn (ALARNG)). There are 403 

personnel deployed today. The average daily number of personnel deployed 

remains around 400 soldiers throughout the exercise period. 

d. NH99-2 Nicaragua (NH99NU). This exercise was originally scheduled 

to be supported by an Active Component element. The requirement shifted to 

the Reserve Component mid-February. The Ohio ARNG has accepted the lead 

State role. The ARNG will be augmented by an engineer battalion from the 

USMC-R for horizontal efforts, and is scheduled to construct two schools, three 

clinics, six wells, and conduct as many as seven medical training exercises. This 

exercise will provide training for 2,300 ARNG soldiers. The deployment phase is 

underway now, with the first construction rotation scheduled to be on the ground 

by 29 May. The exercise concludes 21 Aug, with redeployment from Nicaragua 

completed by 15 Sep. A small leaders reconnaissance team consisting of the 

task force commander and key staff are deployed to Nicaragua now (18-24 

April). 

e. Forward Command Element (FCE). This command cell was requested 

by GEN Wilhelm to meet the increased need for oversight in the Central 

American region due to the number and complexity of the exercises being 

conducted. The Ohio ARNG has the lead on this effort, and has provided the 

Appendix L-10 451 
 

 

 

 

CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

FCE Commander, BG James Caldwell. The task force deployed on 13 March 

(via ANG C-130) and is currently operational at Soto Cano AB, Honduras. The 

FCE provides command and control for two USAR-led exercises in Guatemala, 

one USAR-led exercise in El Salvador, and the ARNG-led exercise in Nicaragua. 

The focus for this element is sustained C2 over the ongoing exercises. 

Embedded within the FCE will be an Army aviation section with fixed wing 

capability (C-23). Staffing for the FCE is split between the Reserve 

Components. There are currently 90 deployed with the FCE, of which 49 are 

ARNG, 36 are USAR, and three civilian contractors, one Air Force and one Naval 

Reserve. The FCE will be operational 13 March through 1 September, with 

redeployment to be completed by 20 September. 

f. ARNG Helicopter Support. The ARNG is also providing helicopter 

support to two USAR-led exercises in Guatemala (6 UH-60 helicopters and 

crews) and one USAR-led exercise in El Salvador (3 UH-1 helicopters and 

crews). 

3. Funding for New Horizons Exercises. 

a. Pay and Allowances. Soldiers who rotate through the exercises will be 

paid by normal, statutory Annual Training funds. Duration staff elements are 

being paid from T10 ADSW short-tour funding. Because the duration staff 

requirements are additive requirements and were not originally funded for FY99, 

Army has submitted a request for supplemental funding for $7.3 million dollars to 

reimburse the ARNG for these activities. 

b. All Operations and Maintenance funding for transportation, building 

materials, and incremental costs for preparation, deployment, redeployment, and 

reconstitution come from sources external to the ARNG. 

MAJ Glenn Hagler/NGB-ARO-Y/703-607-9303 

haglerg@ngb-arng.ngb.army.mil 

Approved by:__________________________ 

452 Appendix L-10 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

APPENDIX M: USEFUL INTERNET SITES FOR FOREIGN DISASTER 

RELIEF OPERATIONS ROTATIONS1 

Reference Address (URL http://) 

Army Acquisition Contingency Contracting http://acqnet.sarda.army.mil/acqinfo/zp 

cntcrt.htm 

Army Acquisition Web Site http://acqnet.sarda.army.mil/home.htm 

British Civil Defense http://www.britishcivildefence.org/ 

CALL’s Humanitarian Relief Links http://call.army.mil/call/homepage/hum 

anity.htm 

Center for Disease Control Travel Information Page www.cdc.gov/travel/ 

CIA World Fact Book www.odci.gov/cia/ 

Coordination Center for the prevention of Natural Disasters in 

Central America (CEPREDENAC) with the Governments of 

Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and 

Panama as members 

http://www.cepredenac.org/en/index.sh 

tml 

Council on East Asian Libraries: Asian country info. darkwing.uoregon.edu/~felsing/ceal/we 

lcome.html 

Dartmouth Flood Observatory http://www.dartmouth.edu/artsci/geog/fl 

oods/index.html 

DefenseLINK www.dtic.dla.mil/defenselink/ 

Disaster Relief : information on current disaster operations 

worldwide. SIte sponsored by Red Cross, CNN & IBM. 

www.disasterrelief.org/ 

Disaster Relief Site’s List of Links http://www.disasterrelief.org/Links/ 

Doctors Without Borders http://www.dwb.org/index.htm 

European Community Humanitarian Office (ECHO) http://europa.eu.int/comm/echo/en/inde 

x_en.html 

Federal Agencies on the Internet (by Louisiana State University) www.greatlakes.gsa.gov/BCS/fedgov.h 

tml 

Freddie FORSCOM MACA Page (Military Assistance to Civil 

Authorities) 

http://freddie.forscom.army.mil/maca/ 

Freddie FORSCOM Reference Lists & Links for MACA http://freddie.forscom.army.mil/MACA/ 

htm/links.htm 

HazardNet by Simon Fraser university http://hoshi.cic.sfu.ca/hazard/ 

Interaction: Coalition of over 150 NGOs and PVOs for working for 

FHA 

www.interaction.org/ 

Joint Doctrine Home Page www.dtic.mil/doctrine/index.html 

Journal of Humanitarian Assistance http://www-jha.sps.cam.ac.uk/ 

Appendix M 453 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

Links to US embassies and consulates with web sites travel.state.gov/links.html 

Mapquest Home Page: Maps, atlases, and directions. Good 

zoom feature for details. 

www.mapquest.com 

Maps - Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection http://www.lib.utexas.edu/Libs/PCL/Ma 

p_collection/Map_collection.html 

National Geographic Society Home: maps & atlases www.nationalgeographic.com/main.ht 

ml 

National Institute for Urban Search and Rescue http://niusr.org/ 

NYFD DART Site (New York City Fire Department Disaster 

Assistance Response Team) 

http://www.fdnydart.org/ 

OFDA FOG--Assessment Checklists www.info.usaid.gov:80/ofda/fog/ch2ho 

me.htm 

OFDA Home Page (USAID’s Office of Foreign Disaster 

Assistance) 

http://www.info.usaid.gov/ofda/ 

OFDA: Field Operations Guide (FOG), with DART organization. www.info.usaid.gov/ofda/fog/foghme.ht 

m 

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 

Development Assistance Committee 

http://www.oecd.org/dac/ 

Pacific Disaster Management Information Network (PDMIN): 

online library of links, publications, electronic journals; up-to-date 

information on disasters; country and cultural information; 

technology for DM personnel; and online educational and training 

materials for disaster management personnel. 

http://coe-dmha.org/website/index.htm 

Partners and Food in Emergency and Development Aid http://www.univ-lille1.fr/pfeda/ 

Red Cross—International Committee of the Red Cross http://www.icrc.org/ 

Red Cross—International Federation of red Cross and Red 

Crescent Societies 

http://www.ifrc.org/ 

Red Cross—The American Red Cross http://www.redcross.org/ 

Refugee Studies Center, University of Oxford http://www.qeh.ox.ac.uk/rsp/indexrsp.h 

tml 

Relief Net: List of and links to various relief organizations http://www.reliefnet.org/ 

The Humanitarian Practice Network http://www.odihpn.org.uk/ 

The Internet Journal of rescue and Disaster Medicine http://www.ispub.com/journals/ijrdm.ht 

m 

The University of York Post-War Reconstruction and 

Development Unit 

http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/arch/prdu/ 

UN Administrative Committee on Coordination Sub-committee on 

Nutrition 

http://acc.unsystem.org/scn/ 

UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) http://www.unicef.org/ 

UN Development Program http://www.undp.org/ 

UN Directory of UN Humanitarian Organizations http://www.reliefweb.int/contacts/dirho 

mepage.html 

UN Directory of UN Humanitarian Organizations http://www.reliefweb.int/contacts/dirho 

mepage.html 

454 Appendix M 
 

LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN CENTRAL AMERICA: HURRICANE MITCH,1998-1999
 

UN Division of Emergency & Humanitarian Action http://www.who.int/eha/ 

UN Food and Agricultural Organization http://www.fao.org/ 

UN High Commissioner for refugees http://www.undp.org/ 

UN Home Page http://www.un.org/ 

UN Integrated Regional Information Networks: info. on disaster 

struck areas 

http://www.reliefweb.int/IRIN/index.pht 

ml 

UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, Office for the 

Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) 

http://www.unisdr.org/ 

UN Mine Action Services http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/mine/ 

UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs http://www.reliefweb.int/ocha_ol/index. 

html 

UN Population Information Network: includes health & 

demographic information 

http://www.undp.org/popin/ 

UN Relief Web 

UN Dept of Humanitarian Affairs links to other FHA sites. 

www.reliefweb.int/ 

UN Web Site Index http://www.unsystem.org/index.html 

UN World Food Program http://www.wfp.org/index.htm 

UN World Health Organization http://www.who.int/ 

University College Cork International Famine Center http://www.ucc.ie/famine/ 

US AID http://www.info.usaid.gov/ 

US Department of State http://www.state.gov/ 

US Embassies & Consulates 

List of U.S. embassies and consulates with addresses and phone 

numbers. 

A-D 

www.lebanon.com/immigration/nasralla 

h/embassies_a_d.htm 

US Embassies & Consulates 

E-M 

www.lebanon.com/immigration/nasralla 

h/embassies_e_m.htm 

US Embassies & Consulates 

N-Z 

www.lebanon.com/immigration/nasralla 

h/embassies_n_z.htm 

World Bank http://www.worldbank.org/ 

Appendix M 455 
CENTER FOR L AW AND M ILITARY O PERATIONS 
 

456 Appendix M 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 

This publication is dedicated to the members of all agencies involved in 

the Hurricane Mitch relief effort who selflessly worked to ease the 

suffering in Central America. 

The Center for Law and Military Operations- while assuming full 

responsibility for any errors contained herein- gratefully acknowledges 

the assistance of the following individuals in collecting lessons learned 

and preparing this publication: 

LTC JEFFREY ADDICOTT 

MG JOHN D. ALTENBURG 

MR. LARRY ANDERSON, DSCA 

LTC ELIZABETH D. BERRIGAN 

CDR BRIAN J. BILL, USN 

CPT GLENN E. BOWENS 

MS. PHYLLIS BOWMAN 

MS. MICHELE CECIL, INST. DEFENSE ANALYSIS 

MAJ LOUIS A. CHIARELLA 

LTC ALAN COOK 

MAJ HOLLY COOK 

CPT TIERNAN DOLAN 

MR. BYRD EASTHAM 

SSG MARY A. FLORENCE 

MAJ PATRICK GARCIA, USAR 

LTCOL TERRIE M. GENT, USAF 

LTC KARL M. GOETZKE 

COL DAVID E. GRAHAM 

CPT MARK HANNIG 

COL WILLIAM E. HARLAN 

MAJ MARY E. HARNEY, USAF 

COL ANTHONY M. HELM 

CPT ADRIAN G. HENDERSON 

MAJ THOMAS L. HONG 

COL MARK S. HOWARD 

MAJ DALE N. JOHNSON 

LTC JAMES K. LOVEJOY 

MS. JUDY MCCALLUM, DSCA 

LTC JOHN W. MILLER, II 

CPT SUZANNE MITCHEM 

MR. BEN MORGAN 

LTC TIMOTHY J. PENDOLINO 

MS. PATSY PHILLIPS 

MAJ TYLER L. RANDOLPH 

LTC DARRELL R. RIEKENBERG, USAR 

BG THOMAS J. ROMIG 

MAJ CHARLES H. ROSE 

CPT DAN SAUMUR 

MR. YAN SCHOLLAERT, CARE 

MAJ MARTY SITLER, USMC 

MAJ MICHAEL SMIDT 

MR. PETER SMITH, USAID 

LTC ALCIDES VALEZ, JR. 

MS. LYNN VEGA, USAID 

CPT SCOTT D. WALTERS 

MAJ NEOMA WHITE 

The Center for Law and Military Operations would like to extend special 

thanks to MAJ Tyler L. Randolph, who served as primary editor of this 

publication, and to The Judge Advocate General’s School, Army, for hosting 

the Hurricane Mitch AAR. 
Center for Law
 

and Military
 

Operations
 

74