Posted on Oct 10, 2024
Are there policies that outline reservists doing RST to Volunteer during Hurricane?
7.2K
28
8
9
9
0
I work in healthcare and want to sign up to volunteer with a group going to Florida to assist with the Hurricane Milton destruction.
Being in the reserves, there’s an upcoming drill weekend. Looking into policies regarding such but could not find any.
Seeking some advice on this matter.
Thank you in advance.
Being in the reserves, there’s an upcoming drill weekend. Looking into policies regarding such but could not find any.
Seeking some advice on this matter.
Thank you in advance.
Posted in these groups: Community Service Volunteer
Army Reserve Elements
Army Reserve Elements
Posted 2 mo ago
Responses: 2
The overall implication of your question is "can you get drill RST credit for assisting in another unit's operational mission?" and that is a lot more complicated than doing cross-COMPO training.
There is no overarching policy or regulation governing what exactly will constitute an acceptable rescheduled training (RST) - that is determined by the commander. There IS overarching guidance in AR 140-1* (section 3-12) to aid the commander in determining acceptable RST activities, but the one stipulation is that it contributes directly to the unit's mission. RSTs are also not "ad-hoc", but more formalized 'alternate training'.
Keep in mind that doing a RST for what you are describing is problematic for a number of reasons. One of the biggest is that when you are performing a RST, you're in an authorized drill status, so you are not a "civilian performing volunteer duty" but a "USAR Soldier in a title 10 status" and will require more hoops to jump through to do what you want.
I believe a better question would be if you can recieve an excused absence from drill that you can subsequently make up through an alternate equivalent training (ET) or a rescheduled training. The authorized excusal should be pretty easy to obtain and likely you would be able to make up the absence via ET or RST.
The 'low-hanging fruit' that commanders will usually do is have you knock out online mandatory training of applicable time length (i.e., 4+ hours for each UTA).
---------------------------------------------------
* AR 140-1 (USAR - Mission, Organization, and Training) - https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/r140_1.pdf
There is no overarching policy or regulation governing what exactly will constitute an acceptable rescheduled training (RST) - that is determined by the commander. There IS overarching guidance in AR 140-1* (section 3-12) to aid the commander in determining acceptable RST activities, but the one stipulation is that it contributes directly to the unit's mission. RSTs are also not "ad-hoc", but more formalized 'alternate training'.
Keep in mind that doing a RST for what you are describing is problematic for a number of reasons. One of the biggest is that when you are performing a RST, you're in an authorized drill status, so you are not a "civilian performing volunteer duty" but a "USAR Soldier in a title 10 status" and will require more hoops to jump through to do what you want.
I believe a better question would be if you can recieve an excused absence from drill that you can subsequently make up through an alternate equivalent training (ET) or a rescheduled training. The authorized excusal should be pretty easy to obtain and likely you would be able to make up the absence via ET or RST.
The 'low-hanging fruit' that commanders will usually do is have you knock out online mandatory training of applicable time length (i.e., 4+ hours for each UTA).
---------------------------------------------------
* AR 140-1 (USAR - Mission, Organization, and Training) - https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/r140_1.pdf
(7)
(0)
SSG Carlos Madden
COL Randall C. - If I'm following correctly, the part where doing an RST with an FLNG unit gets messy because the solider is USAR. Therefore payment, orders, accountability, etc. becomes a real problem if the SPC is even allowed to do so by not only his command, but the NG unit's command.
(1)
(0)
COL Randall C.
SSG Carlos Madden - Yes/No - the admin isn't so much the issue (pay will still be through the home unit, accountability is however the USAR Commander decides is adequate (different from local accountability), and there wouldn't be orders involved as it is approved alternate training that is constructive credit of attendance for the scheduled drill.
If SPC Sal (USAR Soldier) was doing a RST to train with a National Guard unit, there wouldn't be an issue as long as the training is in line with RST requirements (training which directly contributes to the unit's mission). The issue is that the National Guard unit would be performing an authorized mission (not training) and they would be in a T32 or State Active Duty status.
The T10 vs T32 issues are a dogged beast regarding the authority to perform the mission, even at the individual level, when it comes to DSCA.
If you REALLY want to dig into the weeds, suggest a "light" reading of JP 3-28*, however suffice it to say that the hoops to properly authorized a USAR Soldier to RST with a National Guard unit (in T32 or SAD status) while performing a mission (again, not training) falls into the category of "the juice is not worth the squeeze".
-----------------------------------------------------------
* JP 3- (Defense Support of Civil Authorities) - https://www.jcs.mil/portals/36/documents/doctrine/pubs/jp3_28.pdf
If SPC Sal (USAR Soldier) was doing a RST to train with a National Guard unit, there wouldn't be an issue as long as the training is in line with RST requirements (training which directly contributes to the unit's mission). The issue is that the National Guard unit would be performing an authorized mission (not training) and they would be in a T32 or State Active Duty status.
The T10 vs T32 issues are a dogged beast regarding the authority to perform the mission, even at the individual level, when it comes to DSCA.
If you REALLY want to dig into the weeds, suggest a "light" reading of JP 3-28*, however suffice it to say that the hoops to properly authorized a USAR Soldier to RST with a National Guard unit (in T32 or SAD status) while performing a mission (again, not training) falls into the category of "the juice is not worth the squeeze".
-----------------------------------------------------------
* JP 3- (Defense Support of Civil Authorities) - https://www.jcs.mil/portals/36/documents/doctrine/pubs/jp3_28.pdf
(1)
(0)
SGM Mikel Dawson
COL Randall C. - Reason I was asking, when I was assigned to the 104th Div (Tng) USAR, I was working as a guide in Central Idaho. I know there was several times I RST with a Guard unit in Montana. Was a pre-arranged, no problems. Did this several times.
(2)
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
I am thinking about the funding for going AD to support National Disaster Relief efforts that go beyond drill pay and don't know the answer. Several years ago, when I was working with the Alabama NG, I put 10 M-Day soldiers on Active Duty orders in support of National Disaster Relief efforts. I got funding from NORTHCOM which was funded by FEMA to facilitate the action.
I was fortunate to have taken a week to study DTS and create a DTS Smart Book with lots of pictures because it was a Friday afternoon and the DTS Admins left early, which means I was stuck cutting 1610 orders to put the 10 soldiers on AD and pay them per diem that Friday afternoon. This is what the Smart Book looked like. I gave the Smart Book to Army Finance which means some other soldier gets slap the name on it and get credit for it. lol
I was fortunate to have taken a week to study DTS and create a DTS Smart Book with lots of pictures because it was a Friday afternoon and the DTS Admins left early, which means I was stuck cutting 1610 orders to put the 10 soldiers on AD and pay them per diem that Friday afternoon. This is what the Smart Book looked like. I gave the Smart Book to Army Finance which means some other soldier gets slap the name on it and get credit for it. lol
(2)
(0)
4
4
0
Call your commander or first line leader and see, I would assume they would allow it under the circumstances.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google