imposed, but a report to the Department of the
Army or Department of the Air Force is
required. See the Naval Military Personnel
Manual (MILPERSMAN), Article 1860320.5a
and 5b, for the procedures to follow.
Express agreements do not extend to Coast
Guard personnel serving with a naval
command, but other policy statements say that
the naval command should not try to exercise
NJP over such personnel assigned to its unit.
Because the Marine Corps is part of the
Department of the Navy, no general restriction
extends to the exercise of NJP by Navy
commanders over Marine Corps personnel or
by Marine Corps commanders over Navy
Imposition of NJP on
The CO or OIC of a unit attached to a
ship for duty should, as a matter of policy,
refrain from exercising his or her power to
impose NJP and refer all such matters to the
CO of the ship for disposition. This policy
does not apply to Military Sealift Command
(MSC) vessels operating under masters or to
organized units embarked on a Navy ship for
transportation only. Nevertheless, the CO of
a ship may permit a CO or an OIC of a unit
attached to that ship to exercise NJP authority.
Imposition of NJP on Reservists
Reservists on active duty for training or,
under some circumstances, inactive duty for
training, are subject to the UCMJ and,
therefore, subject to the imposition of NJP.
The offense(s) that the CO or OIC seeks
to punish at NJP must have occurred while
the member was on active duty or inactive
duty training. However, it is not necessary
that NJP occurs (or the offense even be
discovered) before the end of the active duty
or inactive duty training period during which
the alleged misconduct occurred.
regard, the officer seeking to impose NJP has
the following options:
l He or she may impose NJP during the
active duty or inactive duty training when the
l He or she may impose NJP at a later
period of active duty or inactive duty training
(so long as this is within 2 years of the date
of the offense).
l He or she may request from the
regular component officer exercising general
court-martial jurisdiction (OEGCMJ) over the
accused an involuntary recall of the accused to
active duty or inactive duty training to impose
l If the accused waives his or her right
to be present at the NJP hearing, the CO or
OIC may impose NJP after the period of
active duty or inactive duty training of the
accused has ended.
Punishment imposed upon persons who
were involuntarily recalled for imposition of
N J P m a y n ot
include restraint unless
SECNAV approves the recall.
Right of an Accused to Demand
Trial by Court-Martial
Article 15a, UCMJ, and part V, par. 3,
MCM, 1984, provide another limitation on the
exercise of NJP. Except for a person attached
to or embarked in a vessel, an accused may
demand trial by court-martial in lieu of NJP.
This right to refuse NJP exists up until the
time of imposition of NJP (that is, up until the
CO announces the punishment). This right is
not waived by the accused having previously
signed a report chit showing that he or she
would accept NJP.
The category of persons who may n ot
refuse NJP includes those persons assigned or
attached to a vessel who are on board for