Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
Mrs. Nancy L. Amos | Analyst |
Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
Reconsideration to be acted upon and she had relied, to her detriment, on a de facto finding of not being held financially liable for the accident. She contended that she reasonably believed the ROS process had concluded she was not liable. She also contended that Anniston Army Depot was a subordinate TACOM unit and TACOM Policy 7-97 dated 11 September 1997 waived financial liability in an ROS for Government employees for damage caused by simple negligence resulting from accidents involving Government owned or leased vehicles.
8. There is no evidence to show the applicant relied, "to her detriment," on the excessive time lapse as a de facto approval of her Request for Reconsideration. The applicant's initial financial assessment was for $438.55. The last document she received prior to the March 2002 denial of relief of financial liability held her liable for $438.55. She never received a document lifting that liability from her. Her final assessment in March 2002 was for $438.55.
9. There is no evidence of record to show repairs to the vehicle were not made prior to it being turned back in to GSA. There is no evidence of record to show GSA did not make the repairs or made the repairs without charging the Army the costs of repair.
10. It is acknowledged that Anniston Army Depot is a subordinate of TACOM-Warren, just as three other organizations are subordinate to TACOM-Warren. However, TACOM Policy 7-97 applied only to one of those subordinate units – U. S. Army Garrison Selfridge and its subordinates. It did not apply to Anniston Army Depot (or Red River Army Depot or Picatinny Arsenal).
11. There is no evidence to show the applicant was unfairly or inequitably assessed liability for the accident.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__mkp___ __mhm___ __rtd___ DENY APPLICATION
are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
__Margaret K. Patterson
CHAIRPERSON
CASE ID | AR2003089393 |
SUFFIX | |
RECON | |
DATE BOARDED | 20040429 |
TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
DISCHARGE REASON | |
BOARD DECISION | DENY |
REVIEW AUTHORITY | Mr. Chun |
ISSUES 1. | 116.01 |
2. | |
3. | |
4. | |
5. | |
6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089577C070403
On 29 May 2001, the Survey officer notified the applicant of the ROS recommendation that she assessed financial liability in the amount of $3,358.10 for the damage to the GOV. Thus, the obstruction should be the proximate cause of the accident, not her negligence as was indicated in the ROS. Paragraph 13-28 of the same regulation states that a survey officer's responsibility is to determine the cause and value of the loss, damage, or destruction of Government property listed on the ROS and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089397C070212
The applicant requests that the Board reverse the findings of a report of survey which found him financially liable. In the processing of this case a staff advisory opinion was provided by the Army Logistics and Transformation Agency (ALTA) which opines, in effect, that simple negligence is the standard used by the Army to assess financial liability against military members and Department of the Army civilian employees involved in vehicular accidents involving government owned or leased...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091285C070212
The applicant was assigned recruiting duty with the Raleigh Recruiting Command in April 2000. The fact that the applicant was unable to stop in time to avoid hitting the vehicle in front of her shows that she was following too close for the conditions under which she was operating the vehicle. This amounts to a finding of simple negligence and places the determination of whether or not to afford the applicant a waiver of financial liability based on a matter of equity as determined by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017026
Financial liability can be assessed against any person who fails, through negligence or misconduct, to perform duties of responsibilities and where such failure is the proximate cause of damage to the U.S. Government. Paragraph 13-29c of Army Regulation 735-5 states that before holding a person financially liable for a loss to the Government, the facts must clearly show that the persons conduct was the proximate cause of the loss, damage, or destruction (LDD). Whether or not speed was a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067958C070402
The Board considered the following evidence: APPLICANT REQUESTS: That he be relieved of financial liability in the amount of $1,417.50 imposed against him by Report of Survey (ROS) Number 44-00, dated 15 May 2000. Chapter 13 of Army Regulation 735-5 states that the Government may impose a finding of financial liability whenever negligence or willful misconduct is found to be the proximate cause of any loss, damage, or destruction of Government property.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059184C070421
The applicant provided a rebuttal to the ROS on 1 July 1997 in which he stated that the van’s mechanical defects were the proximate cause of the accident, therefore he should not be held liable and requested financial relief. He once again argued that the van’s mechanical defects were the proximate cause of the accident; that the anti-lock braking system was defective, that his reckless driving charge was reduced to operating an unsafe vehicle; and that because of these arguments; he should...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083686C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 24 September 2001, the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for financial liability in the amount of $1,985.32 as a result of the findings of the ROS. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087987C070212
The evidence of record shows that, at approximately 1315 hours on 13 June 2002, the applicant the driver of a GOV and was attempting to pass a semi-truck on a rain-soaked, two-lane highway when he was involved in a collision with a minivan. It states that the surveying officer's findings and recommendation, and the approving authority's actions in finding that the applicant violated a particular duty involving the care of the GOV are correct in law and fact. Chapter 13 of Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063542C070421
The applicant requests the finding of financial liability in Report of Survey (ROS) #00-48 be reversed and all monies collected from him be returned. It also states that the applicant’s request for reconsideration, in which he states that his section sergeant “commandeered” his vehicle, appears to exonerate him of responsibility for the loss. As such, he had supervisory, direct, and personal responsibility for the vehicle and the BPC.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067532C070402
The Board considered the following evidence: APPLICANT STATES : That she was a military police company commander and that the surveys were initiated as a result of shortages discovered during her change of command joint property inventory. She was informed that she was being considered for financial liability on 3 May 2001 and she sought legal advice and rebutted the surveys on 18 June 2001.