Pentagon to detail plan for military to bolster homeland security

[A.Member]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27989275/

The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.

The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of the U.S. Northern Command.

If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials nationwide. All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it.

Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S. Army War College's Center for Strategic Leadership, said the new Pentagon approach "breaks the mold" by assigning an active-duty combat brigade to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now, the military required the command to rely on troops requested from other sources.

"This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn't something that you want to have a pickup team responsible for," said Tussing, who has assessed the military's homeland security strategies.

So, perhaps I'm missing something here but my question, as it pertains to the last set of quotes, is this:  doesn't this mission fall in line with what the NG and, to a lesser extent, the Reserves were created for in the first place?  Seems this responsibility should fall to those units as opposed to AD units.  Why not restructure those units and put them back into a role that is more in line with their designated purpose?

Thoughts?

[BuckeyeDEJ]

The lines have blurred between active and reserve folks quite a bit.

Since this is more of a civil defense issue, where will CAP fall inside the plan? Or will it be overlooked? If this is the sort of thing the National Guard was designed for, well, this is the sort of stuff for which CAP was intended to help.

[A.Member]

The lines have blurred between active and reserve folks quite a bit.

I absolutely agree.  NG and Reserve have been leaned on heavily.  I guess that's my point.  This seems like the perfect type of mission to reclarify that "line" and bring them back to their core purpose.

Since this is more of a civil defense issue, where will CAP fall inside the plan? Or will it be overlooked? If this is the sort of thing the National Guard was designed for, well, this is the sort of stuff for which CAP was intended to help.

I agree.  However, the pessimist in me suspects that we both know the answer to this.  If we were to take on such a role, we would need to very clearly define our role and capabilities in such a mission.  This would require a much stronger strategic vision than I've seen thus far.  I believe a higher level of training would almost certainly be required as well.  However, it could be a great opportunity for the organization.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I agree.  However, the pessimist in me suspects that we both know the answer to this.  If we were to take on such a role, we would need to very clearly define our role and capabilities in such a mission.  This would require a much stronger strategic vision than I've seen thus far.  I believe a higher level of training would almost certainly be required as well.  However, it could be a great opportunity for the organization.

A higher level of training and a greater commitment to execution. It could mean a LOT to CAP, though.

[DNall]

The full-time national guard teams they're talking about have been in place for years. This is larger federal forces that fall in behind the guard teams in case of larger scale emergencies.

That's 100% Army mission. And belongs more to the Reserve (5th Army in particular) than anyone else.

This is the guys in "sum of all fears" that are doing the radiation tests after the nuclear blast. They do high end hazmat & CRBNE related work.

[RiverAux]

It appears that the Army is going to rotate which brigade is assigned to Northern Command since the same article says the one they're starting with (1st of the 3rd Div) is going to be deployed again in the not so distant future.  So, I don't think we're talking about the NBC experts like in the NG teams, just regular infantry for the most part. 

[Stonewall]

I was a part of the Air National Guard's CERFP (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and High Yield Explosive Enhanced Response Force Package) in West Virginia.  We've had these teams for a few years now.

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and high-yield Explosive (CBRNE) Enhanced Response Force Package (CERFP)

CERFP Mission: To provide immediate response capability to the governor including: incident site search capability of damaged buildings, rescuing trapped casualties, providing decontamination, and performing medical triage and initial treatment to stabilize patients for transport to medical facilities.

Overview: The CERFP is comprised of four elements staffed by personnel from already established National Guard units. Elements include: search and extraction, decontamination, medical, and command and control. The command and control team directs the overall activities of the CERFP, and coordinates with the Joint Task Force–State (JTF-State) and the incident commander. The search and extraction element is assigned to an Army National Guard Engineering Company, the decontamination element is assigned to an Army National Guard Chemical Company, and the medical element is assigned to an Air National Guard Medical Group. Security duties for the incident site and the four CERFP elements are performed by the state National Guard Response Force. 

"The successful integration of civilian and military cultures and capabilities has long been one of the strengths of the National Guard."                                                               

~LTG Steven Blum, Chief, National Guard Bureau

[BuckeyeDEJ]

There's fears in some quarters that this is another step to a big political change in the nation, and it's not all from the tinfoil-hat crowd. From the left, it's the ACLU, and from the right, it's the libertarian Cato Institute and others who are throwing flags on the play.

Mission creep is possible, sure, but it doesn't seem possible that Chemical Corps and Corps of Engineers soldiers could rustle up people.

Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said the troops are subject to the Posse Comitatus Act (funny, isn't that the same law that keeps "USAF" off the sides of our airplanes and off our MAJCOM patches now?).

If anything, if I were a Guardsman, I'd be insulted:

Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S. Army War College's Center for Strategic Leadership, said the new Pentagon approach "breaks the mold" by assigning an active-duty combat brigade to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now, the military required the command to rely on troops requested from other sources.
"This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn't something that you want to have a pickup team responsible for," said Tussing, who has assessed the military's homeland security strategies.

Insulted, especially since members of the Guard are as involved in the Global War on Terror as reservists and active-duty troops.

A good question is which missions will go wanting for manpower so this initiative can be met. Or, are we going to grow the military again, the hell with BRAC and force reductions?

Just a few thoughts.

[DNall]

We're not in a force reduction. We're in a sizable fore expansion, albeit mostly in the Army/Marine side & at the cost of personnel in the AF/Navy. We'll be continuing on that course for the foreseeable future, though I expect we're cutting back technology, research, and acquisition programs in a dramatic way over the next decade.

As far as the guard being insulted... the force with primary responsibility for this mission set is a full-time part of the guard controlled by the governors. The issue is in the case of a massive emergency situation (nuke goes off in your population center) then this single force of a couple hundred folks in your state is not going to be enough. Right now they'd be pulling backup from the part-time guard. And that's fine, those folks are fully competent, but their training is focused on their regular military mission, not low probability domestic missions.

What this program does is rotate large federal for components thru a training cycle for response to domestic attack response, so that they can serve as a back up for those existing guard forces.

As a guardsman, I'm not insulted, cause I don't have time to train my soldiers for both their federal jobs, disaster response jobs, and to be part of a highly specialized team to show up in case a nuke goes off at an NFL stadium. 

[DNall]

This is what I'm talking about that exists at the national guard level for a decade now:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/wmd-cst.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/6wmd-cst.htm

They are the tip of the spear, immediately on the ground to assess the situation & identify follow on needs. The problem at this point is the military has no one really trained to be that follow on force. Right now, you'd just get generic engineer/chemical/etc units with no training in even ICS, much less the specialized response to WMD type attacks.

The guard units that would be most appropriate to respond don't have time in a drill schedule to train for an overseas mission and something as intensive as this on the domestic side.

The Reserve is the primary federal force tasked with responding to domestic disasters. That's 5th Army in particular. But, they don't have the ability to have a full time force focused on this domestic response & also able to maintain an overseas qualification. It'd be too expensive.

What the govt is looking to do is pull a few active duty units off the deployment rotation for long enough to cross-train for this type of large scale response. They will no longer be the best combat forces, nor the best domestic response forces, but they'll be able to respond adequately & with a fair degree of expertise. It'll also be military, versus civilian, which is something that's favored coming out of Katrina - or more specifically, it'll have a clear single line of authority & be responsive to the President.

Mission creep is always a legitimate concern, but this is combat units doing some minimal cross-training for an extra duty job in case of a major incident. It's not troops on the streets searching house to house for your guns & daughters. It's also not something there's a lot of room or reason for CAP to participate in.

[NC Hokie]

The guard units that would be most appropriate to respond don't have time in a drill schedule to train for an overseas mission and something as intensive as this on the domestic side.

The Reserve is the primary federal force tasked with responding to domestic disasters. That's 5th Army in particular. But, they don't have the ability to have a full time force focused on this domestic response & also able to maintain an overseas qualification. It'd be too expensive.

I may be missing something here (wouldn't be the first time), but it seems to me that the plan is to train active duty resources to do a job best suited to the guard and reserve components.  Wouldn't it make more sense to cut back guard and reserve deployment so they can do the job they were created to do?

[Timbo]

  Wouldn't it make more sense to cut back guard and reserve deployment so they can do the job they were created to do?

Wow......that would make sense right?!?!  I think that would be the best thing to do actually.  Here is a plan.....divide the country into Corps areas.....within each corps the states can decide what their National Guard will specialize in and when something does happen in that section of states (the corps area) the respective states will send in their National Guard.    hmmmm......almost like what was imagined of the National Guard when they were reorganized in 1900? (I am bad on the date....I think it was 1900, maybe 1911.)

[DNall]

The guard units that would be most appropriate to respond don't have time in a drill schedule to train for an overseas mission and something as intensive as this on the domestic side.

The Reserve is the primary federal force tasked with responding to domestic disasters. That's 5th Army in particular. But, they don't have the ability to have a full time force focused on this domestic response & also able to maintain an overseas qualification. It'd be too expensive.

I may be missing something here (wouldn't be the first time), but it seems to me that the plan is to train active duty resources to do a job best suited to the guard and reserve components.  Wouldn't it make more sense to cut back guard and reserve deployment so they can do the job they were created to do?

It's not deployments that are the issue. one wknd a mo/2wks a year is the min time required to stay familiar (not generally current) for just the Army job. In order to actually do that Army job for a deployment, they have to go thru a MOB process to refresh their general soldier skills and their specific job.

Any training for any type of even minimal state mission detracts from that requirement.

This particular domestic mission requires intensive training. Full-time is almost a necessity. So, you can create this 20k person full-time guard/reserve force that deploys anywhere in the country & doesn't have another mission so never gets used. OR, you can take troops already on active duty, take them out of the rotation to train up for this domestic contingency, then put them back in the rotation = minimal cost for maximum gain.

[Timbo]

OR, you can take troops already on active duty, take them out of the rotation to train up for this domestic contingency, then put them back in the rotation = minimal cost for maximum gain.

Unless they happen to actually be deployed.  Then what happens??  Do you always leave them out of rotation?  If that is the case, then this should fall to the Department of Homeland Security. 

PLUS cost wise......it takes more tax dollars to train Regular component than it does to train NG.  Cause states are required to pay for a very small bit of NG training along with the FED.  If you want to get real technical......the real world costs to keep NG or even RESERVE soldiers training for this mission does not equal the enormous amount that it would cost to train AD.  Lets not forget we are paying for AD soldiers food, family support, education, etc 365 days per year.  NG and Reserve we pay for their subsistence only a few weeks out of the year.  At a taxpayer vantage......training up NG or reserve to do this mission may actually be more cost effective. 

I am not saying this is a bad idea, but there are other options that should be investigated before the AD component gets this mission. 

[NC Hokie]

It's not deployments that are the issue. one wknd a mo/2wks a year is the min time required to stay familiar (not generally current) for just the Army job. In order to actually do that Army job for a deployment, they have to go thru a MOB process to refresh their general soldier skills and their specific job.

Any training for any type of even minimal state mission detracts from that requirement.

This particular domestic mission requires intensive training. Full-time is almost a necessity. So, you can create this 20k person full-time guard/reserve force that deploys anywhere in the country & doesn't have another mission so never gets used. OR, you can take troops already on active duty, take them out of the rotation to train up for this domestic contingency, then put them back in the rotation = minimal cost for maximum gain.

That's a good explanation of how it SHOULD work, but the reality is that SOMEONE has to deploy overseas to fill-in for the active duty units being trained.  At the present time, that is most likely going to be a guard or reserve unit.  If you're going to activate a guard or reserve unit anyway, why not just send them to the training?  Yeah, they'll grumble about it but at least they won't be going overseas.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

We're not in a force reduction. We're in a sizable fore expansion, albeit mostly in the Army/Marine side & at the cost of personnel in the AF/Navy. We'll be continuing on that course for the foreseeable future, though I expect we're cutting back technology, research, and acquisition programs in a dramatic way over the next decade.

That's pretty much what I'm saying -- overall, the force is reduced -- but you're getting branch-specific on me. Yes, there's the whole blue-to-green thing.

But if they're talking about new missions without increasing manpower, I don't know how they're reasonably going to do it. That's why I said maybe it's time to go back on the overall military reduction process that started under Bush 41 and gained steam under Clinton.

[DNall]

Overall the force is not reduced, it's slightly expanded & is expanding further, primarily at this point is cross-leveled with AF/Navy reducing a bit & Army/Marines growing a bit. The plan is to grow the force upwards of 50k over pre-9/11 levels. That is going back on the Clinton era reductions, but at the same time, we're not about to go back to cold war levels, certainly not in the middle of a period of economic stress.

OR, you can take troops already on active duty, take them out of the rotation to train up for this domestic contingency, then put them back in the rotation = minimal cost for maximum gain.

Unless they happen to actually be deployed.  Then what happens??...

PLUS cost wise......it takes more tax dollars to train ...[snip]... Lets not forget we are paying for AD soldiers food, family support, education, etc 365 days per year.  NG and Reserve we pay for their subsistence only a few weeks out of the year.

That's why there are three active brigades that will train up on this. If you're familiar with the current division rotation process, it involves one Bde in train-up for a year, one avail for deployment, then one in post-deployment (regardless if they did or not) reset/recover/refit. Three Bdes will train up, one will be in on-call status at all times.

Regarding the costs... As I stated, this mission requires one of two things. Either a full-time force that has the time to cross-train on this domestic response; or, a reserve component that trains for ONLY this with no overseas mission & still would have significant trouble getting to or staying where they need to be on training. So, you can take an existing active force that you're already paying & hand them an extra duty assignment. OR, you can stand up a new reserve force from the ground up, including the significant number of full timers that come with it.

That's a good explanation of how it SHOULD work, but the reality is that SOMEONE has to deploy overseas to fill-in for the active duty units being trained.  At the present time, that is most likely going to be a guard or reserve unit.  If you're going to activate a guard or reserve unit anyway, why not just send them to the training?  Yeah, they'll grumble about it but at least they won't be going overseas.

It's not an initial training & you're done process. It's take a year off from the deployment cycle to do the initial train up, then constant training from now on. A guard/reserve unit would not be able to do that additional training in a drill setting in addition to their primary Army jobs. An active force does have the time in addition to their primary Army job to cross-train on this domestic mission. It won't be perfect, but it'll be good enough for a follow on force, and it's basically free cause you're already paying for the people and equipment.


All this said, I think this is stupid. I think DHS sucks & any leader in their right mind would prefer to have troops that will do what they're told & get the job done, but this is absolutely out of the active force's lane.

[PORed]

DNall, on what grounds or experience are you making your claims? Have you ever worked with DHS before, and I mean actually have preformed real missions with them. Alot of talking heads will knock down DHS but you have to think about all the organizations that fall under DHS. The Secret Service, Customs and Border Patrol, and the US Coast Guard just to name a few. There where growing pains at the start but things have become much smoother. This reactionary force was a result of the 9/11 Commision, so that we can better respond to threats. This is not a slam against Guardsmen or Reservist, but you a person will be more proficient in a job when they do it daily and not just for a drill weekend. That is all this is, a small unit of experts. The National Guard will be there in time of National Distress just like they always have.

[PaulR]

There where growing pains at the start but things have become much smoother. This reactionary force was a result of the 9/11 Commision, so that we can better respond to threats.

Exactly.  The DHS is the newest branch of the government, being only five years old.  I think that the branch is quickly evolving into a most effective instrument.  We do have a way go before all the kinks are worked out, but we have come a long way.  The fact that there has not been a successful terrorist attack since Sep01 is a testiment to this!  

[DNall]

DNall, on what grounds or experience are you making your claims? Have you ever worked with DHS before, and I mean actually have preformed real missions with them. Alot of talking heads will knock down DHS but you have to think about all the organizations that fall under DHS. The Secret Service, Customs and Border Patrol, and the US Coast Guard just to name a few. There where growing pains at the start but things have become much smoother. This reactionary force was a result of the 9/11 Commision, so that we can better respond to threats. This is not a slam against Guardsmen or Reservist, but you a person will be more proficient in a job when they do it daily and not just for a drill weekend. That is all this is, a small unit of experts. The National Guard will be there in time of National Distress just like they always have.

The primary on this event type is the guard CSTs, which are full-time. If you aren't aware of this, a substantial portion of the guard is full-time active duty.

The force being stood up here is multiple full-time combat Bdes, totaling out at 20k people. But, this is a secondary mission for them. They will not spend nearly as much time on it nor be remotely as expert as the CST folks that do nothing but this. No one, including me, has proposed use of a part-time force to fill this role. That could be done, but that would have to be all they do, and that would give you an equally capable force for a lot more money. What's being proposed here is the most efficient way to field this force within the military structure.

As for DHS, yes I have worked with a whole lot of them extensively. The problem currently is exactly that they have a bunch of agencies that don't yet work well together. Integration & lines of authority tend to be muddied up by comparison to a military force that salutes & drives on w/o question. I think most of this response should be civilian, and civilian led, but when you get political leaders and the general public freaking out demanding immediate action, they don't necessarily want the best solution, they want the decisive one they know they can trust.

[PORed]

DNall so your issue with DHS is they are civilians. So by that justification all agencies that fall under the Justice Department are a failure as well. How about the Department of Defense for that matter, they have a civilian politician secretary in charge of the organization. I am familiar with the National Guard structure and most of them are not active guard, for the most part it is support personnel that are Active Guard. There is nothing wrong with active response force for this type scenario, we have worked with ME National Guard here in Portland for dirty bomb scenario and stuff like that, they where great and very knowledgeable. This is a dedicated rapid reaction force to deal with these threats it comes down from the recomendation of people much smarter and more in the know then you or me. And once again I am reminded that arguing on forums is useless.

[DNall]

Slow your roll & read what I said.

I didn't say MY problem with them was they're civilians. I actually said emergency response SHOULD be majority civilian AND civilian controlled. I don't think the military should be involved any more than absolutely necessary.

What I said is politicians/general public have a higher degree of trust in, and very strong preference for the decisive order following get the mission done & sort out the legal issues later military. I said the military is going to tend to give a substandard response to what civilian agencies can or should be able to do, but we're still going to use the military, cause we have them & we trust them more.

I don't have a problem with any individual agency of DHS that I've had exposure with. As I said, it's the currently poor integration, and their poor performance as an overall agency due to that integration, and frankly some missing pieces and under-developed portfolio. That will all mature out eventually, but so far they've given the public the impression their trust is better placed in the military, and that's unfortunate.

Of course the majority of the national guard is not full-time, but a significant number are. Yes there are admin/support types & they are most visible, but the majority of full-timers are actually focused on operations & training. There's also a special operations task force that assists law enforcement, there's a very large counter drug task force, there's a large staff running 24hr operations center & trickle down at key units, there's a whole slate of full-time instructors, and there's CST.

CST is full time does nothing but response to these kinds of WMD scenarios. They are and will remain the tip of the spear. The federal force being set up is NOT taking over for them, nor will it be as capable. It is very specifically a less specialized follow-on force. It will respond to CST driven situations, and to back up the guard in disaster response, again as a follow up force.

[PORed]

Groovy

[JohnKachenmeister]

OR, you can take troops already on active duty, take them out of the rotation to train up for this domestic contingency, then put them back in the rotation = minimal cost for maximum gain.

Unless they happen to actually be deployed.  Then what happens??  Do you always leave them out of rotation?  If that is the case, then this should fall to the Department of Homeland Security. 

PLUS cost wise......it takes more tax dollars to train Regular component than it does to train NG.  Cause states are required to pay for a very small bit of NG training along with the FED.  If you want to get real technical......the real world costs to keep NG or even RESERVE soldiers training for this mission does not equal the enormous amount that it would cost to train AD.  Lets not forget we are paying for AD soldiers food, family support, education, etc 365 days per year.  NG and Reserve we pay for their subsistence only a few weeks out of the year.  At a taxpayer vantage......training up NG or reserve to do this mission may actually be more cost effective. 

I am not saying this is a bad idea, but there are other options that should be investigated before the AD component gets this mission. 

I don't want to steal DNall's thunder, especially since his experience is way more recent than mine, but...

The US Govt. pays for all NG training except state-specific training (such as training an MP unit in state law in preparation for a deployment to a riot.)  Training a NG unit to do this recovery mission would cost the same as training a AD unit.

IF such a scenario took place, the Guard would be among the victims, not among the responders.  So would the Guardsmen's families.   Even WE humble, stupid, uniform-wearing civilian wannabees who can't wear uniforms right plan to bring CAP assets from areas NOT affected by a disaster when we are called to respond on DR missions.

Where did you get the idea that the NG was a force designed to respond to domestic emergencies primarily?  The NG is, always has been, and always will be a part of the US Army and US Air Force that allows for the rapid expansion of the Army or Air Force by keeping trained persons on call in a reserve setting.  The term "National Guard," far from being descriptive of the mission, was adopted to honor Lafayette's "Garda National" that came to help us during the Revolution.  The Army Reserve was originally designed to augment the NG with a force comprised of medical professionals. 

[DNall]

^That's all correct, but we've very rapidly here transitioned away from being a strategic reserve. The IRR is now the strategic reserve, as jacked up as that is. And, NG is absolutely an operational force that deploys just as often as active duty.

More than half the combat power of the Army is in the national guard, and we come with our own support. The reserve on the other hand is primarily support units that back-fill mostly active duty units, but we get some of them. They don't deploy as much as units.

The guard is "on call" and on hand for the governor so we can respond quickly to situations, but we're just one part of a giant team it takes to tackle emergencies. Luckily we also tend to find ourselves in leadership positions within that response, which is why I'm here & not the reserves that offered me a direct commission or active that wanted to take me as a WO.