Click Here to
Order this information in Print

Click Here to
Order this information on CD-ROM

Click Here to
Download this information in PDF Format


Click here to make your Home Page

Page Title: Subsequent Action
Back | Up | Next

Click here for a printable version




Information Categories
.... Administration
Food and Cooking
Nuclear Fundamentals
  Educational CD-ROM's
Printed Manuals
Downloadable Books



circumstances should the investigation of a claim be delayed  because  criminal  charges  are  pending. The  investigation  makes  findings  of  fact  and opinions on whether the claim: l l l l l is by a proper claimant (in writing and for a definite  sum). is made within 90 days of the incident that gave rise to it. is for property belonging to the claimant that was the subject of damage, loss, or destruction by a member or members of the naval service. specifies the amount of damage suffered by the claimant. is  meritorious. The  investigation  also  makes  recommendations about the amount to be assessed against the responsible parties. If more than one service member is responsible, the   investigation   must   make   recommendations concerning the amount to be assessed against each individual. A preponderance of the evidence is necessary for pecuniary  liability  under  Article  139. Normally, the measure of a loss is either the repair cost or the depreciated replacement cost for the same or similar  item.  Depreciation  for  most  items  depends  on the  age  and  condition  of  the  item.  The  Military Allowance  List-Depreciation  Guide  should  be  used  in determining  depreciated  replacement  cost. Subsequent Action If  all  offenders  are  attached  to  the  command convening  the  investigation,  the  CO  assures  that  the offenders  have  an  opportunity  to  see  the  investigative report and are advised that they have 20 days in which to submit a statement or additional information. If a member  declines  to  submit  further  information,  he  or she will so state, in writing, during the 20-day period. The  CO  reviews  the  investigation  and  determines whether the claim is in proper form, conforms to Article 139, and whether the facts indicate responsibility for the damage by members of the command. If the CO finds that the claim is payable, he or she fixes the amount to be  assessed  against  the  offender(s). If the CO has authority to convene a GCM, no further review of the investigation is required. If the CO does not have GCM CA, the investigation and the CO’s action  is  forwarded  to  the  OEGCMJ  over  the  command for review and action. The OEGCMJ will then notify the CO of his or her determinations, and the CO will take action consistent with that determination. If   the   offenders   are   members   of   different commands,  the  investigation  is  sent  to  the  OEGCMJ over the commands to which the alleged offenders are assigned.  The  OEGCMJ  makes  sure  the  alleged offenders are shown the investigative report and are permitted to comment on it before action is taken on the claim. The   OEGCMJ   reviews   the   investigation   to determine whether the claim is properly within Article 139 and whether the facts indicate responsibility for the damage on members of his or her command. If the OEGCMJ determines that the claim is payable, he or she fixes  the  amount  to  be  assessed  against  the  offenders  and direct their COs to take action accordingly. The OEGCMJ may, upon request by either the claimant or the member assessed for the damage, reopen the investigation or take other action he or she believes is in the interest of justice. If the OEGCMJ anticipates acting favorably on the request, he or she will give all interested parties notice and an opportunity to respond. If the claim is for $5,000 or less, the claimant or the member against whom pecuniary responsibility has been assessed may appeal the decision to the OEGCMJ within  5  days  of  receipt  of  the  OEGCMJ’s  decision.  If good cause is shown, the OEGCMJ may extend the appeal  time.  The  appeal  is  submitted  via  the  OEGCMJ to JAG for review and final action. Imposition of the OEGCMJ’s decision is held in abeyance pending final action by JAG. RELATIONSHIP TO COURT-MARTIAL PROCEEDINGS Article   139   claims   procedures   are   entirely independent   of   any   court-martial   or   nonjudicial punishment  proceedings  based  on  the  same  incident. Acquittal  or  conviction  at  a  court-martial  may  be considered by an Article 139 investigation, but it is not controlling on determining whether a member should be assessed for damages. The Article 139 investigation is required  to  make  its  own  independent  findings. EXAMPLE Facts. YN3 Snootfull got uproariously drunk, stole street of Anywhere, Florida, at 85 mph. Finding this less a U.S. Government sedan, and drove down the main 12-28

Privacy Statement - Press Release - Copyright Information. - Contact Us - Support Integrated Publishing

Integrated Publishing, Inc. - A (SDVOSB) Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business