The Army Lawyer (Sep 78) by LOCDocs

VIEWS: 130 PAGES: 64

									    HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMV
                                                                        LAWYER
    Department of the Army Pamphlet                           Minor Symposium on Federal Civilian
                27-50-69                                         Labor Relations: Introduction
             September 1978                      4

                                                              This edition of The A r m y Lawyer includes two
                                                             articles o n federal labor relations subjects. The
                                                             first of these deals with the past practices doc-
                                                              trine, and the second with picketing of military
                                                              installations by civilian employees of the gov-
                                                             ernment.
                   Table of Contents                         Although the federal labor relations program is
    Minor Symposium on Federal Civilian Labor Rela-          on the derge of major reorganization (see A r m y
      tions: Introduction                               1    Lawyer, M a y 1978, 97-58), the anticipated
    The Past Practices Doctrine in Federal Labor-            changes will be largely procedural and should
      Management Relations                              1    have n o significant effect o n the substantive
    The Right of Federal Civilian Employees to Picket        discussion in either labor law article.
      a Military Installation: Does It Exist?           11
    Role of the Deputy Staff Judge Advocate             18
    International Law-The Role of the Legal Ad-
      visor, and Law of War Instructors                 22
    Professional Responsibility                         25   The Past Practices Doctrine in Federal
    Administrative and Civil Law Section
    Judiciary Notes
                                                        27
                                                        33
                                                                 Labor-Management Relations
    Legal Assistance Items                              36       Major Dennis F. Coupe, JAGC, Senior
    Claims Item                                         36       Instructor, Administrative & Civil Law
    Reserve Affairs Section                             37
    Current FLITE Searchable Data Base                  41
                                                                           Division, T J A G S A
    CLE News                                            42
    JAGC Personnel Section                              66     Newly assigned installation commander to
    Current Materials of Interest                       69   Civilian Personnel Officer:
                                                                  “I see our civilian employees are taking a
                                                                  twenty minute coffee break in the morning
                                                                  and another twenty minute break in the
                                                                  afternoon. I don’t think that much time off
                                                                  i s necessary-are      these breaks au-
                                                                  thorized?’’
t
-
     DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                              2
       Civilian Personnel Officer:                                trine, unofficial or informal concessions from
         “Yes, sir. The regulations authorize up to               command representatives on discretionary
                                                                  civilian personne1 policies can lead to the es-
         an hour off per day for rest breaks.”
                                                                  tablishment of employee rights that restrict
       Installation Commander:                                    those commands when they later seek t o
         “Are we required t o give them the                       change or abolish the informally established
         breaks?”                                                 policies. If the facts indicate actual or construc-
                                                                  tive acceptance of the informal practice by its
       Civilian Personnel Officer:                                representatives, a command may find itself as
         “Well, not by regulation, but they’ve been               bound to continue with the practice as it would
         taking the breaks for years. There may be                under a clause in the collective bargaining
t        some legal problems with the union if we                 agreement (CBA).
         just cut them off. . . we’d better have the                 This type of restriction on management
         SJA see if there’s anything in our con-                  rights may occasionally be due to a willingness
         tract .”                                                 to penalize loose management practices, but
       This dialog illustrates an aspect of federal               more often reflects the bona fide attempt of an
    labor-management relations t h a t can be                     arbitrator or administrative law judge to de-
    troublesome for all commands where federal                    termine the intent of management in allowing
    employees are unionized: the effect of past per-              the personnel practice t o become established.
    sonnel practices on command prerogative.                      Analogous with the equitable doctrine of laches
                                                                  or the real property doctrine of adverse posses-
                                                                  sion, the past practices doctrine penalizes lack
         I. General Scope of the Doctrine                         of diligence in the enforcement of managelhent
       From a maze of highly technical collective                 rights. The loss of rights by a failure to exer-              ,/-
    bargaining requirements in federal labor rela-                cise them is a fairly fundamental concept, but
    tions law,’ a “past practices” doctrine of re-                understanding how the past practices doctrine
    quired negotiation and contract interpretation                applies requires familiarization with some of
    has emerged that bodes ill for unwary manag-                  the more technical facets of the federal labor
    ers.2 Under this federal labor relations doc-                 relations program.


      The Judge Advocate General                                      The Army Lawyer welcomes articles on topics of inter-
        Major General Wilton B . Persons, Jr.                      est to military lawyers. Articles should be typed double
      The Assistant Judge Advocate General                         spaced and submitted to: Editor, The Army Lawyer,
       Major General Lawrence H. Williams                          The Judge Advocate General‘s School, Charlottesville.
     Commandant, Judge Advocate General’s School                   Virginia, 22901. Because of space limitations, it i s un-
       Colonel Barney’L. Brannen, Jr.                              likely that articles longer than twelve typewritten pages
    . Editorial Board                                              can be published. I f the article contains footnetes they
       Colonel David L. Minton                                     should be typed on a separate sheet. Articles should fol-
       Lieutenant Colonel Vlctor G. McBride                        low A Uniform System of Citation (12th ed. 1976). Man-
       Major Percival D. Park                                      uscripts will. be returned only upon specific request.
     Acting Editor                                                 No compensation can be paid for articles.
       Major Percival D. Park                                         Individual paid subscriptions are available through the
     Administrative Assistant                                      Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Print-
       Ms. Helena Daidone                                          ing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. The subscription
                                                                   price is $9.00 a year, 80g a single copy, for domestic
                                                                   and APO addresses; $11.25 a year, 81.00 a single copy,
      The Armv Lawger is published monthly by The Judge            for foreign addresses.
    Advocate General’s School. Articles represent the opin-           Funds for printing this publication were approved by
    ions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the         Headquarters, Department o f the Army, 26 May 1971.
    views of The Judge Advocate General or the Department          Issues may be cited as The Army Lawlyer, [date], a t
    of the Army.                                                  I[page number].




c
                                                                                            DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                          3
         Basic familiarity with the past practices doc-       scribe the two situations where-the past prac-
      trine of federal labor-management relations             tices doctrine will be applied by federal labor
      will enable staff judge advocates to better iden-       relations authorities, explain the effects of ap-
      tify the potential legal issues involved when           plying the doctrine, and conclude with a synop-
      proposed command decisions would change                 sis of illustrative cases.
      civilian personnel policies, and to channel re-
      search of the labor issues to the designated
      labor counselor3 before legal opinions a r e                 11. Application of the Doctrine
      finalized.
                                                                 Past employment practices can influence the
         Civilian personnel policies, practices, and          outcome of two types of federal labor-
      working conditions often develop informally             management disputes: grievances, at arbitra-
      and are expressly or tacitly accepted by man-           tion over differing interpretations of the CBA,5
      agement representatives a t local commands              and unfair labor practice complaints, at hear-
      without being formally expressed in collective          ings before administrative law judges and the
      bargaining agreements (CBA) or local regula-            Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor-
      tions. Occasionally informal or customary work          Management Relations (A/SLMR).s These two
      policies may be justifiable and necessary for the       types of disputes are settled by totally separate
      details of day to day operations and variances          processes’ that will be briefly explained in the
      in shop room exigencies, but most informal              remainder of this article, but in resolving both
      personnel policies develop either as ad hoc sub-        situations the past practices doctrine can be
      stitutes for procedures that should be formally         pivotal if three preconditions are proven:
      spelled out and agreed upon by management
                                                                 1. The command-management has acted
      and employee representatives, or as the result
r“.   of supervisors misinterpreting the language of
                                                              through local regulation, announcement, mem-
                                                              orandum or other means, to change some in-
      the CBA.4                                               formal personnel policy, practice or working
         Commands should be aware of the possibility          condition that
      that employee representatives may seek to in-             2. has become pervasive (“established”) in
      stitute or enlarge job related benefits by gain-        the group of federal employees represented by
      ing additional concessions from low level               the union, and such informal practice
      supervisors, after such concessions have been
      rejected by management’s official representa-              3. has at least implicitly been sanctioned or
      tives at the bargaining table. First line super-        approved by responsible command representa-
      visors are frequently less aware of potentially         tives after becoming “established.”*
      adverse management effects, and more sensi-
      tive to morale-enhancing, pressure techniques              Even where these three conditions exist,
      such as union “whip-sawing” (They’re doing it           however, there is an important limitation on
      over there, why can’t we do it here?”). Often,          the use of the past practices doctrine: the doc-
      conciliatory supervisors incorrectly assume             trine may not be used to defeat clear provisions
      that their informal concessions may be revoked          of applicable statutes, agency level regulations,
      at will, or managers may be unaware of how              executive order, or the CBA itself.9 To under-
      well established the practice has become.               stand how the establishment of informal per-
        Training of supervisors by the management             sonnel practices can lead to loss of managerial
      Employee Relations Section of the Civilian              authority over unionized federal employees-
      Personnel Office, with timely advice on con-            both at the bargaining table and in local con-
      tract administration from the local labor               tract administration-it is -necessary to have a
      counselor, should minimize the unintentional            basic familiarity with both bargaining obliga-
      establishment of personnel practices at the in-         tions and grievance arbitration in the federal

r\    stallation level. The following paragraphs de-          sector.
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                              P
                                                    4
  111. The Effect of Past Practices On                   practice has not been “established” and the
        Bargaining Requirements                         union is prematurely attempting t o turn a de
                                                        facto personnel procedure into an established
   Under current bargaining requirements, rep-           practice without negotiating. Conversely, the
resentatives of installation commanders must             union will attempt to show that the de facto
bargain with representatives of federal civilian         personnel practice has in fact already become
employee unions on a l matters having a sig-
                       l                                 established and management is seeking to im-
nificant effect on personnel policies, practices        pose the unilateral change by enforcing an ex-
and working conditions except where reserved             pired rule.
by (1) applicable laws, agency level regulations
for which a compelling need exists, (2) speci-             What constitutes an “established practice’’
fied, traditional management rights, and (3)            for negotiability obligations is a question of
party agreement in the CBA. lo The obligation           factually determining whether or not there was
to negotiate and the application of the past            a “meeting o f the minds.” However, express,
practices doctrine are both subject to the con-         unconditional approval o f a policy or practice by
trols of law, agency (DOD and DA) level regu-           responsible management supervisors outside
lation, Executive Order, or the CBA.11 Thus,            the negotiation team can be equated by labor
what are left to the bargaining discretion of           authorities with instant establishment that will
commands below Department of Army level are             require negotiation before the policy can be
usually personnel policies and practices that           retracted.15 Absent express approval, a meet-
are not specifically covered or required by             ing o f the minds and “establishment” may be
higher authority, including “impact bargaining”         shown by such variables as passage of time,
on local methods for implementing required              management acquiesence, and the consistency
personnel policies. 12                                  of the practice.16
                                                                                                             ,r‘
  The obligation to negotiate “matters affect-             In a March 1978 case involving the Ogden
ing personnel policies. . .” means required bar-        Service Center of the Internal Revenue Serv-
gaining on matters with a material effect or            ice,17 the Federal Labor Relations Council
substantial impact on personnel policy. The ob-         clarified the relationship of past practices to
ligation is usually triggered by some                   the bargaining obligation, once the CBA has
personnel-related change that is sought by              expired. The Council first reiterated the well-
either the union or management.13 Changes               established rule that the contracting parties
sought by the union are inevitably designed to          may not unilaterally change established per-
expand employee benefits. Management                    sonnel policies and practices (unless illegal or
changes may be for expansion or restriction of          the changes are waived in the CBA) without
benefits; but, as a practical matter, the union         first giving the union notice and an opportunity
will pursue negotiations only where a possible          to negotiate:
loss o f benefits is perceived.                             Thus it is clear that the obligation to
   The past practices doctrine is usually applied           negotiate, as set forth in section ll(a)
in the context of an unfair labor practice com-             of the Order, requires both parties
plaint alleging that management has unilater-               during the term of an agreement to
ally implemented some new policy, procedure                 maintain established personnel
or working condition that curtails or restricts             policies. . . whether or not such terms
an established practice, without affording the              are incorporated in such agreement,
union an opportunity to negotiate in advance on             unless and until they are modified in a
the change.14 If existing past practices are con-           manner consistent with the Order.18
sist with higher authority but the facts do not
clearly indicate “establishment” of the past            Remanding the Assistant Secretary of Labor
practice, management’s position before the ad-          decision, the Council then stated:
ministrative law judge usually will be that the             In our view, existing personnel policies
                                                                                       DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     5
    and practices and matters affecting                  assistance of the FSIP,22 or the impasse is
    working conditions, whether or not                   resolved in favor of management by the
    they are included in a negotiated                    FSIP,2S(3) the practice has become illegal by
    agreement, continue a s established                  changes in applicable laws and regulation^,^^
    upon the expiration of a negotiated                  (4) the union has specifically agreed to termina-
    agreement absent an express agree-                   tion of the practice in the CBA,25 or (6) the
    ment . . . or unless modified in a man-              change has n o substantial impact upon existing
    ner consistent with the order.lB (Em-                personnel policies practices or working condi-
    phasis added.)                                       tions.26 In the usual case, the union will not
                                                         freely give up an established personnel practice
The Council concluded its opinion in Ogden               without gaining something in return, and will
Service Center, with a reaffirmation that (1)            hold out for impasse resolution procedures.
past practices (whether established in the CBA
or not) must give way to agency-level, compel-
ling need regulations; (2) that management re-             IV. The Effect of Past Practices on
tains the right upon expiration of the agree-,                   Grievance Arbitration
ment to unilaterally change provisions in the
contract relating to permissive, section il(b)             All CBA’s executed in the federal sector
subjects, and (3) that management changes in             must include a grievance procedure for settle-
past practices may be implemented after a                ment of issues that arise under the contract and
legitimate bargaining impasse has been reached           that are not controlled by statutory proce-
if the union has not sought assistance from the                       ~
                                                         d u r e ~ . *Virtually all grievance procedures
Federal Services Impasses Panel after a rea-             provide for binding arbitration as the final step
sonable time.20                                          in the grievance resolution, and most griev-
                                                         ances involve differences between employees
   One clear message in Ogden Seruice Center             and the command over how CBA language
for command representatives i s that the safest          should be interpreted.28 In rendering awards
way to avoid unwanted continuation of an es-             under a CBA grievance procedure, arbitrators
tablished past practice is to provide specifically       are considered to speak for the agency head.28
for expiration of the unwritten practice in the          Past personnel practices are considered by ar-
original contract, in mid-contract negotiations          bitrators as a kind of parole evidence rule for
or in renegotiations. Obviously, a discontinua-          construing ambiguous contractual language in
tion provision will not easily be included if the        the CBA, or, where there is no relevant lan-
union considers the past practice to be desira-          guage, to determine the intent of the parties.a0
ble.
                                                           In their often cited reference on grievance
   Thus, in order for past civilian personnel            arbitration, H o w Arbitration Works, Elkouri
practices to be relevant to negotiations with            and Elkouri state:
the exclusive representative labor organiza-
tion, the requisite conditions must exist: the               Unquestionably custom and past prac-
personnel practice must be a legally permissi-               tice constitute one of the most signifi-
ble command option not specifically controlled               cant factors in labor-management ar-
by the CBA; the practice must be “established”               bitration. Evidence of custom and past
or pervasive in the unit; and it must be at least            practice may be introduced for any of
tacitly acknowledged by management. The                      the following major purposes: (1) to
command may not change lawfully established                  provide the basis of rules governing
personnel practices without committing an un-                matters not included in the written
fair labor practice, unless (1) the union is given           contract; (2) to indicate the proper in-
notice of the change and declines to request                 terpretation of ambiguous contract
negotiations,21 (2) the parties have negotiated              language; or (3) to support allegations
to impasse and the union has not sought the                  that clear language of the written con-
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                               r
                                                      6
     tract has been amended by mutual ac-                 the practices are terminated only by express
     tion or agreement.31                                 language in a new contract, by the establish-
                                                          ment of a superseding personnel practice, or by
  Past practices should not be considered
where the language of the contract is specific
                                                          a change in law or “compelling need”
and unambiguous,32 but inconsistent enforce-              regulati0n.3~
ment of rights by management will affect an                  Grievances can usually be continued to arbi-
arbitrator’s determination of the appropriate             tration during or after the expiration of the
remedy, even where management rights have                 CBA, so the arbitrator’s application of the past
been clearly set out in the contract.33 Attempts          practices doctrine is usually not affected by the
by arbitrators to reach “underlying issues,”              expiration of the CBA. In those situations
beyond the scope of the submission agreement,             where there is no CBA and no agreement on
sometimes result in past practices being con-             grievance procedures, federal employees use
sidered even where no ambiguity exists in the             the Civil Service grievance procedure^,^' which
contractual language.34                                   do not include arbitration. Where there must
   For tactical purposes, it is the author’s con-         be a past or present contractual base to invoke
clusion that arbitrators require more evidence            krbitration and consideration of past practices
of the “establishment” of a past practice than            by arbitrators, past practices are relevant to
do administrative law judges (AM’s) who focus             unfair labor practice proceedings involving the
on the question of compliance or noncompliance            command obligation to negotiate changes even
with the lawful bargaining obligations. The es-           where there is no CBA.
sential question for both Am’s and arbitrators
considering past practices should be: “Was the
practice established and accepted by both man-             V. Cases Illustrating The Application
                                                              of The Past Practices Doctrine      ,P
agement and the employees in place of the                                                        ,
recognized procedure or policy?”                            When the command at U.S. Army Finance
   At arbitration hearings labor counselors may           and Accounting Center, Ft. Benjamin Harri-
find it useful to limit consideration of past prac-       son, Indiana, issued a memorandum attempting
tices by respectfully reminding arbitrators that          to curtail an existing practice that allowed
they are limited to deciding the issue(s) jointly         tardy employees to take annual leave or make
agreed upon and presented by the parties in               up their time during break periods, the Ad-
the submission statement, and that the parties            ministrative Law Judge and A/SLMR con-
should not be permitted to achieve through                cluded as a matter of law that the past practice
arbitration what they were unable to achieve at           was an established condition of employment,
the bargaining table.35 In filing briefs for con-         and refused to allow the unilateral change by
sideration by administrative law judges hearing           the command.38
unfair labor complaints, labor counselors would
                                                             At Ft. Richardson, Alaska, there was an
do well to point out any applicable reasons for
considering or disregarding alleged past prac-            unwritten management policy of allowing all
                                                          nonessential, nonemergency civilian personnel
tices by referring to the same “party intent”
considerations that would govern an arbitrator            to leave work early when inclement weather
hearing.                                                  required base closure. After such a closure was
                                                          announced, t h e Directorate of Facility En-
   Because arbitrators derive their authority             gineers determined that most of its civilian
from the CBA, the existence of a CBA is a                 employees were “essential” for snow removal,
prerequisite for invoking arbitration. However,           contrary to the past practice of designating
it is important to remember that in most cases            lesser numbers of employees as essential. It
established personnel practices will survive an           was held that management had an absolute
expired contract and will require grievance               right to close the base, but committed an unfair
arbitration or negotiation for changes, and that          labor practice by acting without first negotiat-
                                                                                       DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                    n
                                                    6

ing the procedures for determining who were               7. Management changes the competitive
“essential” p e r s ~ n n e l . ~ ~                     areas of a reduction in f0rce.~9
   Recently, many state National Guards have               8. Management discontinues issuance of op-
been ordered to adopt contractual language              tional safety eq~ipment.5~
allowing wear of civilian clothing by technicians
                                                          9. Management curtails environmental dif-
performing military duties, due in part to
                                                        ferential pay based upon it’s belief that em-
allowance of such clothing in the past.40
                                                        ployees are no longer entitled to the extra pay
  At Vandenberg Air Force Base, management              (under contract language referring to FPM
checked on employee sign-out requirements               requirements for the extra pay).51
only thirty percent of the time during 1977, but
                                                          Some informal practices have served as man-
that was held sufficient to rebut an employee’s
                                                        agement shields rather than union swords. In
claim that the sign-out requirements had de-
                                                        the notorious Mare Island “Rat Patrol” case,52
teriorated into a practice of not signing
                                                        the local command issued a memorandum an-
   Occasional use of government secretaries and         nouncing that spot checks would be made by
typewriters to prepare employee grievances              supervisors to determine employee productiv-
and a union newsletter was recently held to be          ity levels. The union unfair labor practice
nonrevocable by management, where the prac-             charge was dismissed because the facts showed
tice was not concealed and had persisted over a         the memorandum to be only a reaffirmation of
period of years.42                                      an already existing policy and no changes ac-
                                                        tually occurred.
  Other examples of management conduct that
resulted in consideration of the past practices
doctrine at arbitration or unfair labor practice                       VI. Conclusion
hearings are:
                                                           The past practices doctrine can bind sub-
  1. The CBA provides t h a t “reasonable”              agency level commands only to the limits of
amounts of official time will be granted for            their local discretion. The most firmly estab-
employees acting as union representatives on            lished informal practice must give way when
employee-related matters. Local management              there is a conflict with applicable law, agency
then sets guidelines more restrictive than those        regulation, or Executive Order. Yet the doc-
followed in the past.43                                 trine can result in loss of significant managerial
                                                        authority through inadvertant foreclosure of
  2. The union is allowed use of facilities,
                                                        local prerogatives.
utilities, long distance phone service, or park-
ing privileges without specific provision in the           In exceptional cases, informal local personnel
CBA.&                                                   practices may provide needed flexibility for
                                                        local personnel managers who know of the
  3. The CBA provides “discipline shall be for
                                                        practices and build in appropriate limitations.
just cause,” and a grievance is filed alleging
                                                        But as a rule, the informalgractices are vested
management’s punishment was more severe
                                                        unintentionally and passed on, like the sins of a
than for like offenses in the past.45                   careless father, to succeeding commanders who
  4. Employee clean-up time is permitted be-            suffer from varying losses of command options.
fore leaving work.&                                     Undesirable past practices usually weaken the
                                                        command bargaining position at formal negotia-
  5. Hours of work and tours of duty are
                                                        tion sessions, because previously optional
allowed t o vary by mutual understanding                trade-off benefits become enforceable expec-
(numbers and types of employees not af-                 tancies (to be changed only by statute, union
fected). 47                                             consent or third party impasse procedures).
 6. Management allows employees to perform              Allowing informal command practices and em-
work away from their normal job site.48                 ployee concessions to become established may
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                                  F
                                                            8
also have an adverse influence on management                        appeals systems that currently are not arbitrable.
when employee grievances are arbitrated.                            These changes would have no significant effect on the
                                                                    application of the past practices doctrine by the new
   Staff judge advocates should be alert for the                    program authorities.
civilian personnel issues in all command deci-                  a   “Agency management” means the agency head and “all
sions. Labor counselors, civilian personnel spe-                    management officials, supervisors, and other represen-
cialists and other responsible staff members                        tatives of management at any level, having authority to
should determine the existence of all local                         act for the agency on any matters relating to the
                                                                    implementation of the agency labor-management rela-
civilian personnel policies, practices and work-                    tions program.. . .” Section 2(f), Exec. Order No.
ing conditions which are not provided for by                        11,491, supra note 1. According to a decision of the
regulation o r CBA. If such informal practices                      Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor-Management
are already “established,” but inconsistent with                    Relations, actions by managers at any level may be the
laws or compelling need regulations, the illegal                    basis for an unfair labor practice under § 19 (a) of the
                                                                    order. Federal Aviation Administration, Oklahoma
practices should be immediately curtailed, and                      City, AlSLMR No. 1047 (1978).
union representatives should be given im-
mediate notice and an opportunity to bargain                        The Army’s Labor Counselor Program was established
                                                                    in July 1974. See DAJA-CP 1974/8342, 15 July 1974. The
on any collateral effects of the curtailment that                   National Guard Bureau inaugurated their Labor Ad-
are negotiable. If the established, informal                        visor Program in June 1977. See NGB Letter, subject:
practice is legally permissible but undesirable                     National Guard Judge Advocates as Labor Advisors to
for the command, negotiations should be re-                         the Technician Personnel Officer, 24 June 1977.
quested on desired changes. If the established,                     See, e . g . , United States Army Finance and Accounting
informal practice is beneficial to management,                      Center, Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana, AlSLMR
it may still be preferable to formalize the                         No. 661 (May 19, 1976), and Department of Defense,
practice by regulation or directive. In the                         Lackland Air Force Base, AlSLMR No. 468 (1974).
latter case, there is no requirement to bargain                     Misinterpretation of c o n t r a c t language can b e
                                                                    minimized by close contact between management
                                                                                                                                 ’7
on mere formalization, but advance notice to                        negotiators and unit supervisors during and a f t e r
the union and an opportunity to bargain on any                      negotiations. The Gov’t Mgr. (BNA) No. 141, a t 4.
impact of the formalization will be required.
                                                                ‘ S e e generally F. ELKOURIand E. ELKOURI, HOW
                                                                   ARBITRATION   WORKS,389-393 (3d ed. 1974).
                     Footnotes                                      See, e.g., Naval Weapons Station, Concord, California,
 Exec. Order No. 11,491, 3 C.F.R. 861 (1966-1970                    AlSLMR No. 1020 (Apr. 13, 1978); Naval Air Rework
 Compilation), reprinted in 6 U.S.C. § 7301 (1976), as              Facility, Pensacola, Florida, AlSLMR No. 608 (Jan. 26,
 amended by: Exec. Order No. 11,616, 3 C.F.R. 605                   1976); and Department of Defense, Lackland Air Force
 (1971-1975 Compilation); [hereinafter cited as Exec.               Base, AlSLMR No. 468 (1974).
 Order No. 11,4911; Exec. Order No. 11,636, 3 C.F.R.                Unfair labor practices complaints under Section 19,
 634 (1971-1976 Compilation); Exec. Order No. 11,838, 3             Exec. Order No. 11,491, supra note 1, are filed,
 C.F.R. 957 (1971-1975 Compilation); Exec. Order No.                investigated and settled pursuant to the A/SLMR pro-
 11,901, 4 1 Fed. Reg. 4807 (1976); and Exec. Order No.             cedural rules in 29 C.F.R. 293 (1976). Arbitration
 12,027, 42 Fed. Reg. 61851 (1977). The order has been              procedures are established by individual arbitrators
 interpreted and applied in approximately two thousand              within the framework of general guidelines for arbitra-
 reported decisions of the authorities administering the            tion set out in the Code of Professional Responsibility
 federal labor-management relations program. Under                  for Arbitrators of Labor-Management Disputes (1974),
 the President’s Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978 (see             approved by the American Arbitration Association, the
 THE ARMYLAWYER,        MAY 1978, a t 37-38) and pending            National Academy of Arbitrators and t h e Federal
 legislative proposals (Civil Service Reform Act of 1978,           Mediation and Conciliation Service.
 H.R. 11,280, 95th Cong., 2d Sess., title VII; a bill t o
 reform the civil service laws, S. 2640, 95th Cong., 2d         a   These three requirements reflect the clear consensus of
 Sess. (1978)) the Executive Order would be replaced by             commentators writing on the influence of past practices
 legislation and certain functions of existing program              in arbitration decisions. See, e . g . , F. ELKOURIAND E .
 authorities would be consolidated in a Federal Labor               ELKOURI,HOW ARBITRATION          WORKS390-393 (3d ed.
 Relations Authority. The proposed changes include                  1974) and 0 . FAIRWEATHER,        PRACTICE AND PROCE-
 mandatory binding arbitration for all negotiated griev-            DURE I N LABORARBITRATION         171-172 (1973). See also
 ance procedures and arbitration of many statutory                  Cox and Dunlop, The D u t y to Bargain Collectively          7
                                                                                                        DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                               9
 During the Term of an Existing Agreement, 63 HARV.                     text of contract termination) is Internal Revenue
 L. REV. 1097, 1116-117 (1950). Perhaps the best discus-                Service, Ogden Service Center, MSLMR No. 806; and
 sion of the use of past practices by arbitrators, with                 Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Serv-
 illustrative cases, is in P. PRASOW E. PETERS,
                                        &                               ice, Brookhaven Service Center, AlSLMR No. 859,
 ARBITRATIONAND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING            78-121                 FLRC Nos. 77A-40 and 778-92 (Rep. No. 147, Mar. 23,
 (1970). PRASOW PETERS
                  AND         stress that the essence of                1978). The Council decisions were implemented by
 the past practice doctrine is that there must be an                    A/SLMR Nos. 1052 and 1053 (May 22, 1978).
 underlying mutuality of intent to allow the practice
 before the practice can be considered to be binding.              11   Id. See also Department of Defense, AlSLMR No. 465
                                                                        (1974).
                     supra note 7, at 395-297;
 F. ELKOURI E. ELKOURI,
          AND
 P.   PRASOW AND    E . PETERS, supra note 7, a t 95-110.          Issee, e.g., EPA, Region 111, AlSLMR No. 949 (1978)
                                                                     and DoD Lackland Air Force Base, AlSLMR No. 468
lo Section11 (a) of Exec. Order No. 11,491, supra note 1,            (1974). Compare U.S. Army Europe and Seventh
  establishes the general scope of bargaining obligation             Army, and Army and Air Force Exchange Service,
  for all matters affecting personnel policies, practices,           Europe, AlSLMR No. 1006 (1978); and Social Security
  and working conditions, subject to applicable laws and             Administration, AlSLMR No. 979 (1978); and Naval
  regulations (agency regulations must be supported by               Weapons Station, Concord, California, MSLMR No.
  compelling need).                                                  1020 (1978). Without attempting a full discussion of the
                                                                     scope of bargaining (SOB) required, it may be helpful
  Section ll(b) provides:                                            for nonspecialists to consider the following formula for
      . . . The obligation to meet and confer does not               analysis of the negotiability of particular proposals or
      include matters with respect to the mission of an              local actions affecting civilian employees:
      agency; its budget; its organization; the number o f
      employees; and the numbers, types, and grades of                                               Applicable laws and
      positions or employees assigned t o an organiza-                                               compelling need, agency
      tional unit, work project o r tour of duty; the                                                level regulations
      technology of performing its work; or its internal
      security practices. This does not preclude the
                                                                                                                +
      parties from negotiating agreements providing ap-                                         Case law interpreting
      propriate arrangements for employees adversely               SOB+section 11 (a) minus (-) Sections 11 (b) and 12 (b)
      affected by the impact of realignment of work                                                              +
      forces or technological change.                                                                Provisions in the CBA
  Section 12(b) provides:
      Management officials of the agency retain the                + impact bargaining + past practices.
      right, in accordance with applicable laws and                la See,    e.g., Department of the Treasury, Internal Rev-
      regulations-                                                       enue Service, Brookhaven Service Center, MSLMR
      (1) to direct employees of the agency;                             No. 814 (1977); Naval Air Rework Facility, Pensacola,
                                                                         Florida, AlSLMR No. 608 (1976), and Department of
      (2) to hire, promote, transfer, assign, and retain                 the Air Force, Vandenburg Air Force Base, California,
      employees in positions within the agency, and to                   NSLMR No. 936 (1977).
      suspend, demote, discharge, or take other disci-
      plinary action against employees;                            1'    Id.; b u t compare Social Security Administration,
                                                                         Singleton, Texas, MSLMR No. 982 (1978).
      (3) to relieve employees from duties because of
      lack of work or for other legitimate reasons;                    An opportunity to bargain is all that management
      (4) to maintain the efficiency of the Government               must provide the union. See, e.g., U.S. Customs
      operations entrusted to them;                                  Service, Houston, Texas, AlSLMR No. 1961 (1978).
                                                                   IbSee, e.g., IRS, Western Region, MSLMR No. 473
      (5) to determine the methods, means, and person-               (1975). Leniency by one of several supervisors should
      nel by which such operations are to b e conducted;             be distinguished from widespread management ac-
      and                                                            quiescence. See UNIVAC, 64 LA 48 (1969). Two
      (6) to take whatever actions may be necessary to               grants of exceptional parking privileges did not mature
      carry out the mission of t h e agency in situations of         into an established parking practice in National Ar-
      emergency. . . .                                               chives and Records Service, MSLMR No. 1055 (1978).
                                                                     See also Headquarters, U.S. Army Material Develop-
  Under Section 4 of the order, each of these provisions             ment and Readiness Command, AlSLMR No. 994
  is subject to interpretation and application by the                (1978).
  Federal Labor Relations Council. A recent case illus-
  trating these limitations under the order (in the con-            16   Supra note 7.
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                                       r
                                                                10
17   Internal Revenue Service, Ogden Service Center, and             Os   P. Prasow and E. Peters, supra note 7 a t 101-109. It
     Brookhaven Service Center, FLRC Nos. 7 7 A 4 0 and                   has been noted that periodic enforcement may be as
     77A-92 (Rep. No. 147, March 23, 1978). I n applying                  much a practice as periodic lapses. I19781 70 Lab. Arb.
     the principles enunciated by the Council, the A/SLMR                 Rep. (BNA) 66.
     found on remand that no change in the resuIts of his
     original decisions was necessary. AISLMR Nos. 1052              51   Sometimes the ambiguity exists in the issue as it is
                                                                          framed and submitted to the arbitrator, rather than in
     and 1053 (1978).
                                                                          the CBA. In United States Forest Service and AFGE,
m I d . at 7.                                                             FLRC No. 75A-4 (March 18, 1976), the arbitrator
                                                                          went beyond the submitted issue and considered the
18   I d . at 7 .                                                         spirit and intent of the whoIe contract as the “under-
2O   Id. a t 11-12.                                                       lying issue that necessarily arose from the grievance.”
                                                                          Management exceptions to the award were rejected by
11   Social Security Administration, Singleton, Texas,                    the Council on the basis that the submission statement
     A/SLMR No. 982 (1978); U.S. Department of Air                        was broad enough to allow the award.
     Force, Norton Air Force Base, A/SLMR No. 261
     (1973).                                                         35   See Code of Professional Responsibility for Arbitrators
                                                                          of Labor Management Disputes, supra note 6, a t 10.
I*   IRS, Ogden, supra note 16, at 10, and U.S. Army
     Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District, A/SLMR               s6   Internal Revenue Service, Ogden Service Center, and
     No. 673 (1976), as distinguished in IRS, Ogden, supra                Brookhaven Service Center, FLRC Nos. 77A-40 and
     note 16; review denied, FLRC No. 76A-94 (Rep. No.                    778-92 (Rep. No. 147, Mar. 23, 1978).
     122, March 25, 1977).                                           s7   5 C.F.R. Part 771.
19   IRS, Ogden, supra note 16, and section ll(a), Exec.                  U.S. Army Finance and Accounting Center, Fort
     Order No. 11,491, supra note 1.                                      Benjamin Harrison, Indianapolis, Indiana, AISLMR
     IRS, Ogden, supra note 16.                                           No. 651 (1976).

     Id.                                                             s9   Directorate of Facility Engineers, Fort Richadson,
                                                                          Alaska, A1SLMR No. 946 (1977) (citing Naval Public
l6   Department of Transportation, AlSLMR No. 939                         Works, Norfolk, Virginia, FLRC No. 71A-66).
     (1977) and Texas Air NationaI Guard, A/SLMR No.
     738 (1976).                                                     40   Massachusetts National Guard, 77 FSIP 18 (Release
                                                                          No. 87, Dec. 28, 1977); Montana Air National Guard,
27   Exec. Order No. 11,491, supra note 1, section 13(a).                 77 F S I P 22 (Release No. 90, Jan. 19, 1978); Kansas
                                                                          Army National Guard, 77 FSIP 30 (Release No. 93,
     Section 13(b) of the order provides for binding arbitra-             Feb. 15, 1978). (“FSIP” means Federal Service Im-
     tion and the Federal Services Impasses Panel has                     passes Panel. Citations such as “77 FSIP 18” are case
     expressed a preference for this method of grievance                  numbers used t o identify individual releases, reports,
     resolution. Department of the Navy, Jacksonville,                    and other documents.) See .also Michigan National
     Florida, and Local 2453, AFGE, Case No. 71 FSIP-20                   Guard, 77 FSIP 33 (1978); New Jersey National Guard,
     (April 26, €972). Section 13 of the order also requires              77 FSIP 47 (1978); and South Carolina National Guard,
     t h e negotiated grievance procedure to be the executive             77 F S I P 26 (1978); and New York Army National
     procedure available to represented employees. If a                   Guard, A/SLMR No. 44 (1974). But compare Ohio
     clear breach of a contractual obligation is established,             National Guard, 77 FSIP 36 (Release No. 79, Apr. 6,
     the unfair labor practice procedures of the AlSLMR                   1978). The “compelling need” argument for exempting
     may be appropriate. Otherwise-where interpretation                   National Guard haircut regulations from negotiability
     of the CBA language is at issue-grievance procedures                 has been rejected by the Federal Labor Relations
     and arbitration will be the method for resolving the                 Council. See, e.g., F L R C No. 77A-106 (Rep. No. 143,
     dispute. See Newark A i r Force Station. A/SLMR No.                  Feb. 28, 1978).
     677 (1976); NASA, Kennedy Space Center, AlSLMR
     No. 223 (19721, and A/SLMR Report No. 49 (15                         Department of the Air Force, Vandenberg Air Force
     February 1972).                                                      Base, CaIifornia, A/SLMR No. 935 (1977).
ID 64      Comp. Gen. 312, 316 (1974).                                    U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue
                                                                          Service, New Orleans District, AlSLMR No. 1034
so   P. Prasow and E. Peters, supra note 7, at 98-198; F.                 (1978).
     Elkouri and E. Elkouri, supra note 4, at 390-397, and
     Duriron Co., [19683 51 Lab. Arb. Rep. (BNA) 185.                IJ   Watervliet Arsenal. US. Army Armament Command,
                                                                          Watervliet, New York, AlSLMR No. 726 (1976).
     F. Elkouri and E. Elkouri, supra note 4, at 889-90.
                                                                          See, e . g . , MSLMR letter with regional administrator‘s
     Id.                                                                  decision (Case No. 22-07786 (CA), May 16, 1977).            7
                                                                                                           7




                                                                                                            DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                               11
45    Tests used by many arbitrators for “just case” deter-              vironmental differential pay (as an interpretation of
      minations are set out in Moore’s Seafood Products,                 the general CBA language) was initiated by a griev-
      Inc., 50 LA 83 (1968).                                             ance settlement and perpetuated informally for two
                                                                         years before curtailment by management. The union
4.3   U.S. Army Finance and Accounting Center, Fort                      grieved and the arbitration award reinstated the pay-
      Benjamin Hamson, Indianapolis, Indiana, AlSLMR                     ments. The Council denied review. Compare Naval Air
      No. 651 (1976). Compare Department of the Treasury,                Rework Facility, Pensacola, Florida, F L R C No.
      U.S. Customs Service, Boston, Massachusetts, FLRC                  7611-37 (Rep. No. 125, June 2, 1977).
      No. 78A-9 (Rep. No. 148, Apr. 3, 1978).
                                                                    6*   Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, California, A/
47    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Philadelphia District,               SLMR No. 736 (1976). Cessation of administrative
      AlSLMR No. 673 (1976); P e t . f o review denied, FLRC
                                          ~                              time allowed employees to prepare rebuttals to per-
      No. 916 (1977). See also Portsmouth Naval Shipyard,                formance evaluations was allowed as a continuation or
      N S L M R No. 820 (1977).                                          reaffirmation of existing requirements in Department
+B    IRS, New Orleans, AlSLMR No. 995 (1978).                           of Transportation, St. Louis, Missouri, A/SLMR No.
                                                                         961 (1978). See also, Pennsylvania National Guard,
      Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, New Jersey, AlSLMR No.                   AlSLMR No. 969 (1978), pet. fov review denied, FLRC
      981 (19781, Department of the Army, Ft. Monmouth,                  78A-18 (June 26, 1978); NSLMR Letter 1119, dated
      New Jersey, A/SLMR No. 919 (1977).                                 May 5 , 1978, re: D e p a r t m e n t of t h e A i r Force,
      Veterans Administration Hospital, Sheridan, Illinois,              McClellan Air Force Base, California (Case No. 70-
      A/SLMR No. 940 (1977).                                             6810), Alabama National Guard, NSLMR No. 895
                                                                         (1977); FLRC No. 77A-115 (Rep. No. 144, Mar. 2,
61    In Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and Federal Metal                     1978); and United States Army School Training Cen-
      Trades Council, FLRC No. 77A-66 (Rep. No. 140,                     ter, Ft. McClellan, Alabama, NSLMR No. 42 (1970).
      December 30, 1977), a past practice of granting en-



                        The Right of Federal Civilian Employees to Picket
                             a Military Installation: Does It Exist?
                                        Captain William S. Ostan,*
                              Labor Counselor, Office of the Staff Judge Advocate
                                           F o r t Dix, New Jersey
                                                       and
                                         M r . Richard P . O’Neill,
                              Management-Employee Relations Division, Civilian
                                  Personnel Office, Fort Dix, New Jersey
   Federal civilian unions are firmly entrenched                    bargain collectively and secure redress of
in the government today and are having an                           grievances on behalf of the civilian employees it
impact on the formulation of personnel policies,                    represents in the bargaining unit. This Execu-
practices, and working conditions which affect                      tive Order has frequently been called the
federal employees. Executive Order 10988,                           “Magna Carta” of federal labor relations.
signed by President Kennedy in 1962 officially
authorized federal civilian employee unions and                       Recently, there has been much controversy
laid down basic ground rules for labor relations                    over the issue of picketing by federal employ-
in the federal service. The original executive                      ees. The interpretation of section 19(b) (4) of
order has been replaced and is presently im-                        the Executive Order has become the focal point
plemented by Executive Order 11491.’ Execu-                         of this issue: Section 19 (b) (4) of the Order
tive Order 11491, as amended, clearly sets                          makes it an unfair labor practice (ULP) for a
forth the basic guarantee to all federal civilian                   labor organization to “Call or engage in a
employees of their right to form, join, and                         strike, work stoppage, or slowdown; picket a
assist a union, and grants the union the right to                   Government agency in a labor-management
DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     12
dispute; or condone any such activity by failing                  I. Informational Picketing
to take affirmative action to prevent or stop               The National Treasury Employees Union
it.” The language of section 19 (b) (4) read              (NTEU) initiated the litigation which resulted
literally clearly proscribes and prohibits federal        in expansion of the picketing rights of federal
employees from picketing a federal agency.                civilian employees. The facts surrounding this
Since the inception of federal unions in 1962,            legal action between NTEU and the Internal
section 19 (b) (4) has been given this interpre-          Revenue Service were as follows: In 1975 an
tation. In 1976, the Federal Labor Relations              impasse had been reached in the negotiation of
Council (FLRC), the ruling body which inter-              their collective bargaining agreement which
prets and administers the executive order,                resulted in NTEU picketing IRS Service Cen-
decided that section 19 (b) (4) of the order              ters in Kentucky and New York. The picket
clearly prohibits aZ picketing of an agency by a
                   E                                      signs related to the labor-management dispute,
labor organization in a labor-management dis-             and the picketing was for the purpose of in-
pute.2 However, only a year later, in January             forming the public and IRS employees of the
1977, the FLRC reevaluated their position by              NTEU’s position regarding that dispute. The
issuing a major policy statement which rede-              picketing was peaceful, had no “signal” effect
fined the rights of federal civilian employees to         on those wishing to enter the Centers and did
                                          .~
engage in informational p i ~ k e t i n g The FLRC        not in any manner interfere with the operation
established a new test to be applied on a                 of the Centers. The IRS filed an unfair labor
case-by-case basis in determining whether in-             practice complaint against- NTEU alleging a
formational picketing is permissible or imper-
                                                          violation of section 19 (b) (4) of the executive
missible.
                                                          order.
   This article examines this new test and the               The NTEU argued that their picketing was
criteria promulgated by the FLRC. This article            purely informational in purpose and effect and
also addresses the legal issues which surround            as such was a form of free speech protected by
this controversial subject in order to develop a          the first amendment. However, the Assistant
proper perspective and understanding of in-               Secretary of Labor for Labor-Management
formational picketing by civilian employees and           Relations (A/SLMR)S ruled that “the language
its impact on the federal sector and military             o f section 19(b) (4) is so clear and unambiguous
installations.                                            that only a literal interpretation is justified,
                                                          i.e., that all picketing in a labor-management
   Since the Council’s statement, federal labor           dispute, including informational picketing, is
unions have exercised their right to engage in            prohibited by the Order.”6 Consequently, the
informational picketing more often. I t is highly         Assistant Secretary held that the NTEU pic-
probable that military installations will be con-         keting at the IRS Centers was unlawful, in
fronted with a picket line composed of federal            violation of section 19 (b) (4); and he ordered
civilian employees in the near future. Thus, it           the union to cease and desist. The FLRC
is important that installation commanders be              affirmed the Assistant Secretary’s decision and
aware of their legal responsibilities and obliga-         NTEU decided to take its case to federal court
tions in responding to picket line activity.              and argue the constitutionality o f section 19 (b)
                                                          (41.’
  This article discusses the procedural re-
quirements that must be followed in processing                    11. District Court Decision
an unfair labor practice complaint and how the             Judge Gerhard Gesell of the U.S. District
installation labor counselor4 works with the              Court for the District of Columbia heard the
civilian personnel specialist as a team in order          arguments of the government and NTEU in the
to advise the installation commander in this              case at bar and the court defined the major
labor-management relations context.                       issue as determining the government’s interest
                                                                                        DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     13    .
in banning picketing, and balancing that inter-              The FLRC decided not to attempt to de-
est against the employees’ right to free expres-                                                  in
                                                          lineate the “myrid circumstances”~3 which
sion. Judge Gesell ruled in National Treasurg             picketing could occur and describe ahead of
Employees Union v. Fussers that while there               time which sorts of picketing would be permis-
were some circumstances in which a ban on                 sible. Instead, the Council ruled that the As-
picketing might be warranted, an absolute ban             sistant Secretary of Labor could continue to
on all forms of picketing by federal employees            process unfair labor practice complaints which
“is overly broad and violates the First Amend-            alleged a section 19 (b) (4) violation. The
                                     Accordingly,
ment when improperly a p ~ l i e d . ” ~                  Council would then distinguish permissible
he overruled and vacated the order by the                 from impermissible picketing on a case-by-case
Assistant Secretary directing NTEU to cease               basis. “In this connection,” the FLRC ruled,
and desist from picketing the IRS.                        “the Assistant Secretary shall fully develop in
   Judge Gesell cautiously avoided ruling that            the record and carefully consider the precise
                                                          government interest sought to be protected and
section 19 (b) (4) of Executive Order 11491 was
                                                          such matters as the sensitivity of the gov-
unconstitutional. Rather he held that the sec-
                                                          ernmental function involved, the situs of the
tion 19 (b) (4) ban was applied in this particular
                                                          picketed operation, and number of pickets, the
case in a manner that infringed upon IRS
                                                          purpose of the picketing, the conduct of the
employees’ constitutional rights.I0 The court
                                                          pickets, and any other facts relevant to the
decided that a dividing line between constitu-
                                                          exact nature of the picketing and the govern-
tionally permissible and nonpermissible types
                                                          ment organization concerned”14 before render-
of picketing could not be drawn “by the use of
                                                          ing his decision on its permissibility.
such vague terms as ‘informational’ or ‘nonin-
formational’ picketing.”11 Rather, the court
suggested that the Federal Labor Relations                            IV. Current Trends
Council may, if it chooses, develop a more
precise standard to apply to picketing in the               The Assistant Secretary of Labor recently
future and promulgate new guidelines to dis-              articulated and clarified the scope of permissi-
tinguish constitutionally-protected picketing             ble picketing activity in two informational
from that which the government may regulate.              picket-line cases. In Joint Council of Customs,
                                                          NTEU,16 the U.S. Customs Service filed an
                                                          unfair labor practice complaint, alleging a vio-
  111. FLRC Major Policy Statement                        lation by NTEU in the union’s picketing of
                                                          Customs a t O’Hare Airport, Chicago, Illinois.
  On January 5, 1977 the Federal Labor Rela-
tions Council announced in a major policy                    The picketing engaged in a t O’Hare by
statement that picketing which “does not ac-              NTEU was to inform the public of the problems
tually interfere or reasonably threaten to                NTEU was experiencing over the negotiation
interfere with the operation of the affected              of a new agreement with the U.S. Customs
government agency. . . will be found permissi-            Service. The picketing was conducted on public
ble under Section 19 (b) (4) of the Executive             property and did not interfere with the opera-
Order 11491.”12In addition, the Government at             tions of Customs. Nor did it interfere with the
this time decided to withdraw its appeal from             ingress or egress of the general public to the
the Fasser decision. The FLRC policy state-               premises or with any deliveries or any other
ment was made in response to the recommen-                normal operations on the premises. On these
dation by Judge Gessel in the Fasser ruling               facts, the Assistant Secretary of Labor found
that the FLRC set up guidelines on picketing              that the picketing met the definition of “per-
so that federal civilian employees’ first amend-          missible picketing’’ established in the Council’s
ment rights would not be violated by the                  Statement on Major Policy IssueI6 and ordered
absolute ban on picketing that is contained in            that the unfair labor practice complaint be
section 19 (b) (4).                                       dismissed in its entirety.”
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                               r‘
                                                    14                                                        .
  The second decision to be rendered on this             connection with a contract dispute when an
topic was in Norfolk Naval Shipyard.I8 The               impasse or deadlock results at the bargaining
unfair labor practice complaint filed by the             table. Department of Defense Directive 1426.1
Department of the Navy alleged that the Tide-            sets forth some specific guidelines for a com-
w a t e r Virginia Federal Employees Metal               mander to follow in responding to picket line
Council, AFL-CIO, violated section 19 (b) (4)            activity.23
by improperly sponsoring and directing pic-
keting of the Navy a t access gates to the                  First, when it comes to the attention of the
Norfolk Naval Shipyard.                                  commander that picketing by federal civilian
                                                         employees may occur, the head of the local
  The evidence established that the picketing            labor organization (union president) should be
was informational in nature since it was for the         apprised of the situation. Either the labor
purpose of informing the union’s members of its          counselor or the civilian personnel specialist
labor-management dispute with the Navy. The              can accomplish this task. Coordination with
picketing was peaceful and caused no interfer-           union officials is the most crucial element in
ence with the operation of the shipyard or               allaying the tensions of the moment. The lines
deliveries.                                              of communication between the union and the
  As in the Customs case a t O’Hare, the                 commander must remain open during the labor
Assistant Secretary of Labor concluded that              dispute. The union should be advised of the
“permissible informational picketing in Federal          informational picketing standards enunciated
sector labor-management disputes is that which           by the Council so that if picketing does occur
is directed a t the general public, including            the union will be aware of its responsibilities in
members of organized labor groups, and which             conducting a picket line within the permissible
does not interfere or reasonably threaten to             guidelinesz4 and hopefully comply.
                                                                                                              ,r
interfere with the operation of the affected                If for some reason the picketing does not
government agency.”ls Thus, the Assistant                conform to the Council’s standards, it may
Secretary held that the union’s informational            become necessary to file an unfair labor prac-
picketing fell within the Council’s definition of        tice complaint. Prior to proceeding against a
“permissible” picketing under section 19(b) (4)          labor organization under section 19(b)(4) of the
of the order and ordered the complaint dis-              order and filing an unfair labor practice com-
missed.20                                                plaint, it-will be necessary to establish first,
                                                         that members of the labor organization are
  V. Department of The Army Policy                       participating or have participated in a prohib-
            On Picketing                                 ited act, and second, that the prohibited act
                                                         was ordered, approved or authorized by a
  Department of the Army policy is that no               responsible official of the labor organization, or
picketing is permitted on the premises of a              that, when apprised of participation by its
military installation.21 However, informational          members in the prohibited act, the responsible
picket lines may be established a t the access           labor organization official did not take prompt
gates of a military installation. When the in-           steps to disavow the act and order members to
stallation commander determines that prohib-             cease their parti~ipation.~5
ited picketing (Le., a section 19 (b) (4) viola-
tion) involving employees or labor organiza-               The “prohibited act” is picketing line conduct
tions representing DA employees is threatened            violative of section 19(b)(4) of the order which
or actually occurs, HQDA must be notified                falls within the purview of the Council’s test as
immediately by te1ephone.z2 It is, therefore,            being picketing which “will interfere with or
incumbent upon the installation commander to             present a reasonable threat of interference
ascertain what the facts are surrounding the             with the operations” of the installation. The
labor-management dispute. Most picketing by              burden of proof is on the government to show
federal employees will probably be done in               the effect that picketing has on the operations
                                                                                            DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                ’    15
of the installation. Therefore, it is vitally im-         labor-management dispute that employees are
portant that the activity of the picket line be           required to report to work as scheduled, i.e., to
monitored and its affect on the operations of             be present at their prescribed time and place of
the installation be well-documented.                      work-unless specifically excused (e.g., annual
                                                          leave or sick leave).27 Federal civilian employ-
  The labor counselor and civilian personnel              ees are not permitted to engage in picket,i.ng
specialist can best perform their function by             activity during official duty time. Employees
ensuring that the facts are fully articulated and         who picket while on duty should be advised
documented and that they support the govern-              that they are subject to disciplinary action for
ment’s decision to file an unfair labor practice          being absent without leave.
complaint against the union. The facts pre-
sented to the Assistant Secretary of Labor
should clearly establish the detrimental impact             VI. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE
that the picketing has had on the operations of                    PROCEDURES
the installation. During the picketing, man-
agement officials (supervisors) or the military              Prior to the filing of an unfair labor practice
police should be assigned to record and monitor           complaint against the union, the installation
the picket-line activity26 in order to buttress           commander must promptly notify and consult
the legal position of the government.                     with Headquarters, Department of the Army
                                                          on the matter.28 This procedure has the effect
   A viable argument can be made on behalf of             of shifting the final decision to file an ULP
the government that picketing which results in            complaint from the installation commander to
the curtailment or disruption of deliveries to            higher headquarters. Assuming that a firm
the installation is no longer protected informa-          legal and factual foundation exists for the spe-
tional picketing. If the reason for nondelivery           cific allegation of a section 19(b)(4) violation,
was a refusal to cross a picket line, a memo for          Le., the picketing does in fact interfere with or
record would be made with the following infor-            presents a reasonable threat of interference
mation: (a) the amount of undelivered property,           with installation operations, and HQDA ap-
(b) the dollar value of the undelivered prop-             proval is granted for the filing of a ULP
erty, (c) when delivery was expected, (d) how             complaint with the Department of Labor, then
the delivery was expected to be made and (e)              the following procedures should be utilized.
why the delivery was not made.
                                                             Among the Assistant Secretary of Labor’s
   A picket-line log should also be established to        rules and regulations are special procedures
record day-to-day events of the picketing.                which provide for the expeditious resolution of
Statements of witnesses should be hand-                   complaints that section 19(b) (4) was breached.
written or typed and checked by the witness               Upon receipt of a section 19(b) (4) complaint
for accuracy immediately after transcription.             the Department of Labor will assign an admin-
They should be signed by the witness, dated               istrative law judge to hold a hearing within 24
and made at the time of the events or conversa-           hours to decide whether there is “reasonable
tions, or immediate1y thereafter. Besides wit-            cause to believe that a section 19(b)(4) violation
nesses, the government may introduce docu-                                       If ~
                                                          is o c c ~ r r i n g . ” ~he so finds, he shall issue an
ments, picket signs, and photographs of the               order which provides for cessation of the al-
picket line activity as evidence in an unfair             leged violative conduct pending disposition of
labor practice proceeding. Consequently, the              the complaint.28 The complaint is then heard
foregoing picket-line log and any other relevant          within 48 hours of the issuance of the adminis-
documentation should be safeguarded.                      trative law judge’s opinion by the Labor De-
                                                          partment’s Chief Administrative Law Judge,
   The commander should also issue an instruc-            who decides whether or not the allegations of
tion to the federal civilian employees during the         the complaint have been proven by a “prepon-
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                               -
                                                                                                                              ,
                                                           16                                                                 ,

derance of the evidence.’QS Thus, the standard                    National Treasury Employees Union and Internal Rev-
                                                                enue Service, Department of Treasury, FLRC Case No.
of proof is entirely different in the two pro-                  75 A-96 (Mar. 3, 1976). The Federal Labor Relations
ceedings. Ultimately, the Chief Administrative                  Council is composed of three members, the Chairman of
Law Judge’s findings, conclusions and recom-                    the civil Service Commission who also serves as Chair-
mendations can be reviewed by the Assistant                     man of the Council, the Director of the Office of Manage-
Secretary of Labor who makes a determination                    ment and Budget, and the Secretary of Labor.
as to whether the union should be ordered to                    SStatement of Major Policy Issue (Government Employee
cease and desist from the picketing and take                    Picketing), FLRC Case No. 76 P-4 (Jan. 6, 1977). For an
affirmative action to stop and prevent any such                 analysis of the Council’s policy statement, see Ostan, The
picketing of the i n ~ t a l l a t i o n . ~ ~                  Right of Federal Civilian Employees to Picket: Confu-
                                                                sion and Controversy, 29 LAB.L.J. 219 (1978).
                                                                ‘In July 1974 The Judge Advocate General of the Army
             VII. CONCLUSION                                    and the Director of Civilian Personnel, Office of the
                                                                Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, established a “labor
   If federal civilian employees should picket a                counselor” program in which Judge Advocate General’s
military installation in conjunction with a                     Corps officers and civilian attorneys were to advise and
labor-management dispute, the installation                      assist local civilian personnel officers and their staffs.
labor counselor and civilian personnel specialist               See DAJA-CP 1974/8342, 15 July 1974. This program has
                                                                found a regulatory basis in a civilian personnel regulation
can render valuable assistance to the com-                      which provides:
mander by ensuring that the FLRC test is
                                                                    The Installation Labor Counselor, a qualified at-
scrupulously applied. The trend today is that                       torney designated by the activity, is available to
informational picketing will be presumed to be                      provide advice and assistance to the civilian per-
permissible and the government has the burden                       sonnel officer on matters such as union contacts
of proving that it was not permissible. Hope-                       involving attorneys, third-party proceedings,
fully, litigation in the future will provide                        grievance resolutions, arbitration, representa-           r“
                                                                    tion, legal advice to negotiation committee, con-
clearer guidance as to the scope and limitations                    tract interpretation, management training (in-
of informational picketing in the federal sector                    cluding instructor assistance), and review of
and the responsibilities of the union and the                       labor relations policies and procedures.
government in exercising and protecting their                   See Civilian Personnel Regulation, CPR-700, ch. 711.A,
rights in this controversial area. Only by                      subch. 1, para. 1-5C (18 Mar. 1975).
keeping abreast of the new decisions of the                        Policies and instructions for their implementation have
Assistant Secretary of Labor and the Council                    been issued to labor counselors by the Office of the Judge
on this subject and working as a “labor rela-                   Advocate General in Dep’t of the Army, Labor Counselor
tions team” can the labor counselor and civilian                Bulletin No. 6, 3 Aug. 1978. Para 1 of this bulletin
personnel specialist assist the commander in                    concerns all types of picket lines at entrances to military
                                                                installations, with emphasis on documentation of the
accomplishing his mission and protecting the                    facts concerning secondary boycotts, if any. Para. 2 deals
installation from interference with its opera-                  with picket lines of federal civilian employees at military
tions by federal employee picketing.                            installations. This paragraph states that picketing on a
                                                                military installation is not permitted, but that informa-
                                                                tional picketing may be conducted a t installation access
                     Footnotes                                  gates. Para. 3 sets forth the “reserve gate plan,” in-
                                                                tended for use primarily when a union strikes a govern-
*JAGC, U.S.Army, Labor Counselor, Office of the Staff           ment contractor working on a military installation. Ac-
Judge Advocate, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort              cording to this plan, the contractor will be required to
Dix, Fort Dix, New Jersey, 1976 to present. A.B., 1972,         use only one specified gate, and other contractors and
Georgetown University; J.D., 1975, University of To-            suppliers and their employees will be prohibited from
ledo. Member of the Bars of Ohio, Pennsylvania, New             using that gate. The striking union can then be required
Jersey, and the United States Court of Military Appeals.        to limit its picketing to that one gate.
Author of Unionization of the Military: Some Legal and
Practical Considerations, 77MIL. L. REV. 109 (1977).            &Under section 6 of the executive order, the Assistant
                                                                Secretary of Labor-Management Relations (A/SLMR) is
l3C.F.R. 254 (1974) As amended      Exec* Order No*             responsible for deciding unfair labor practice complaints.
11838, 40 F e d . Reg. 5743 (1975), entitled Labor-
Management Relations in the Federal Service.                    6A/SLMR No. 536 (July 29, 1976).                              r
                                                                                                            DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                                  17
    lNational Treasury Employees Union and Internal Rev-               the Navy hoped, would have permitted an absolute ban
    enue Service, Department of Treasury, FLRC Case No.                on picketing at a facility with a “critical” and “sensitive”
    76 A-96 (March 3, 1976).                                           national defense function, such as the Navy considers
                                                                       itself to have at the Norfolk shipyard. The Council re-
    8428 F. Supp. 295 (D.D.C. 1976).                                   fused to review the Assistant Secretary’s factual conclu-
    SID. at 300.                                                       sion that the Norfolk shipyard was n o t a facility with so
                                                                       critical or sensitive a mission that no picketing could be
    ‘OThe court offered the following rationale to support             permitted. See Tidewater Virginia Federal Employees
    their decision:                                                    Metal Trades Council FLRC No. 77A-93 (Dee. 20, 1977).
          There is no doubt that the Government can pro-               See also GERR No. 471 at 28 (Jan. 9, 1978).
          hibit picketing which actually interferes w i t i its
          operation. Stopping the disruption of Govern-                   Generally, pickets are excluded from a military instal-
          ment service justifies an incidental limitation on           lation to avoid disruption of necessary military activities
          First Amendment freedoms. Executive Order                    or adverse impact upon other business activities (private
          11491 can constitutionally prohibit any picketing,           contractors) unrelated to the labor dispute between the
          whether or not peaceful and informational, that              federal labor union and the installation. In Greer v.
          actually interferes or reasonably threatens to               Spock, 424 U.S. 828 (19761, the United States Supreme
          interfere with the operation of the affected Gov-            Court addressed the constitutionality of an installation
          ernment agency. The question here is whether                 regulation which prohibited demonstrations, picketing,
          under the Constitution the Government can bar                sit-ins, protest marches, political speeches and similar
          ALL picketing simply because some picketing                  activities on the post. In that case, candidates for the
                                                   .
          may properly be subject to restraint. . . But                offices of President and Vice-president of the United
          surely not all Government activity, at all Gov-              States had been denied permission to enter the Fort Dix,
          ernment offices, requires such broad protection              New Jersey, Military Reservation, for the purposes of
          from peaceful picketing. Picketing that is strictly          distributing campaign literature and discussing election
          informational, and limited in place and focus,               issues with service personnel. The Court upheld the con-
          does not in all situations create the probability of         stitutionality of the challenged regulation and found that
          interference with Government functions suffi-                the regulation had not been improperly applied. Mr. Jus-
                                                                       tice Stewart delivered the opinion of the Court in Spock
          cient to justify the limitations on free speech
          involved here.                                               and stated in forceful language that:
    I d . at 298-99. See also American Radio Assn., AFL-CIO
                                                                             A necessary concomitant of the basic function of
    v. Mobile Steamship Assn., Inc., 419 U.S. 216 (1976) and                 a military installation has been the historically
                                                                             unquestioned power of (its) commanding officer
    Teamsters Union v. Vogt, Inc., 364 U.S. 284 (1967).
                                                                             summarily to exclude civilians from the area of
    “428 F . Supp. at 299.                                                   his command ....
                                                                       I d . at 838. Also:
    I* Statement on Major Policy Issue (Government Em-
    ployee Picketing), FLRC Case No. 76 P-4 (Jan. 6, 1977).                  There is nothing in the Constitution that disables
                                                                              a military commander from acting to avert what
    laid.                                                                    he perceives to be a clear danger to the loyalty,
                                                                             discipline or morale of troops on the base under
    1 4 ~ .
                                                                             his command.
    16 National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 162,                 I d . at 840.
    NTEU: Chapter 172, NTEU; and Joint Council of Cus-                    See also Dep’t of Defense Directive No. 1354.1, Re-
    toms Chapters, NTEU; AlSLMR No. 811 (Mar. 24, 1977).               lationships with organizations Which Seek to Represent
                                                                       Members of the Armed Forces in Negotiation or Collec-
    le State on Major Policy Issue (Government Employee
                                                                        tive Bargaining (6 Oct. 1977) and Army Regulation No.
    Picketing), FLRC Case No. 76 P-4 (Jan. 6, 1977).
                                                                        600-80, Relationships with Organizations Which Seek to
    17 National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 162,                  Represent Members of the Army in Negotiation or Col-
    NTEU; Chapter 172, NTEU; and Joint Council of Cus-                  lective Bargaining (3 Jan. 1978) for prohibitions relating
    toms Chapters, NTUE; NSLMR No. 811 (Mar. 24, 1977).                 to union activity by military personnel. For a discussion
                                                                        of DoD Directive No. 1354.1, see Siemer, Hut, and
    l8Tidewater Virginia Federal Employees Metal Trades                 Drake, Prohibition on Military Unionization: A Con-
    Council, AFL-CIO, (Norfolk Naval Shipyard), A/SLMR                 stitutional Appraisal, 78 MIL. L. REV. 1 (1977).
    No. 867 (July 21, 1977).
                                                                       ‘ZCivilian Personnel Regulation, CPR-700, ch. 711.A.
    1°Id.                                                              subch. 1, para. 1-lld (18 Mar. 1976).
    s o l d . The Norfolk Naval Shipyard appealed the Assistant        *aDep’t of Defense Directive No. 1426.1, Labor-
    Secretary’s decision to the Federal Labor Relations                Management Relations in the Department of Defense (9
    Council. The Navy asked the Council for a ruling which,            Oct. 1974) [hereinafter cited as DoD Dir. No. 1426.11.




I
I
                                                                                                                1
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                              /a

                                                             18                                                              .
%*Para.FC)(b)(l) of DoD Dir. No. 1426.1, which concerns           whether the activity was peaceful o r otherwise, what
resolution of labor management disputes, provides the             language was on the picket signs, and whether there was
following:                                                        any interference with ingress to or egress from the in-
     When information reaches the head of a DoD                   stallation.
     activity that an official of a labor organization            2TIn accordance with DoD Dir. No. 1426.1, employees
     with members employed at the activity has indi-              should also be given the following notification:
     cated that such members may or will engage in
     an act prohibited by section 19(b)(4) of Executive               Employees who, in entering or leaving their as-
     Order 11491, or when it is apparent that employ-                 signed work location, encounter interference o r
     ees a r e actually engaging in such an act, an                   harrassment on the picket line of a sufficiently
     appropriate representative of the activity of DoD                serious nature to arouse concern f o r their per-
     component involved will immediately seek to                      sonal aafety are required to immediately phone
     contact the head of the local labor organization                 their supervisor from the nearest available loca-
     and apprise him of the situation. If the head of                 tion. Arrangements will be made either to escort
     the labor organization disavows o r withdraws                    the employees safely through the picket line or,
     any threatening statements and there is no evi-                  if that is not immediately feasible, to excuse the
     dence that the organization ordered, approved or                 employees from duty until safety can be re-
     authorized a prohibited act, and if prompt steps                 stored.
     are taken by the organization to disavow any                 ZBSee  note 22 supra. See also DoD Dir. No. 1426.1 para.
     such act and order its members to cease their                F(2)(b)(2).
     participation, no further action will be taken               2BSee29 C.F.R. § 203.7 (b) (1976), A/SLMR Rules and
     against the organization.                                    Regulations.
u DoD   Dir. No. 1426.1, supra note 23, para. F(2)(a).            sold.
26Aspects of activity to be recorded include the location
                                                                  alId.
of the picketing, numbers of people involved, and dura-
tion and nature of the picketing activity. Descriptions of        "See 29 C.F.R. § 203.26 (1976).
the nature of the activity should include mention of


                               Role of the Deputy Staff Judge Advocate
                                            Major Scott Magers, *
                                     Former Deputy Staff Judge Advocate,
                                         2d Infantry Division, Korea

   The position of deputy staff judge advocate                    encountered, and suggest how a deputy can
has been much maligned. Lawyers new to the                        make the greatest contribution. I have recently
military view it as the level where a lawyer                      completed an assignment as the deputy staff
ceases to practice law and becomes an adminis-                    judge advocate of the Second Infantry Division.
trator (or worse). Those JAGC captains with                       My thoughts on this subject have been greatly
six or seven years experience may have a more                     influenced by that worthwhile experience. I
sophisticated appreciation of the position re-                    hope this article will stimulate a new apprecia-
quirements, but often do not consider it an                       tion and discussion of the position.
attractive job because of the prevalent percep-
tion that the deputy has little authority or                        I. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN M A
responsibility. Finally, some senior military
lawyers who have not had SJA experience                                       AND DSJA
often lack management skills or experience in
utilizing a deputy, and so reflect an attitude of                   Any analysis of the deputy's role must start
indifference or even confusion toward the role                    with discussion of the relationship with the
of the deputy.                                                    SJA. At least initially, the SJA will define the
                                                                  job based on his own experiences. He likely
  The purpose of this article is to analyze the                   served as deputy earlier in his career and may
position, discuss some of the common problems                     have developed strong opinions of the job based
f-                                                       19
                                                                                            DA Pam 27-50-69

     on how he was used or misused. Additionally,             must be loyal to the SJA at all times if they are
     where the SJA has served in other SJA posi-              to work together effectively.
     tions, the experiences of working with other
     deputies may dictate his view of the relation-             The deputy should have the responsibility of
     ship. Regardless of these previously estab-              supervising the daily operation of the office,
     lished working patterns, however, the profes-            including personnel problems, office adminis-
     sional s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses and              tration and reviewing all completed actions,
     personalities of both officers ultimately will be        whether signed by the         O r another Officer.
     the major factors in defining the deputyps job.          This frees the SJA to concentrate his efforts on
     For example, if the SJA enjoys visiting corn-            providing advice to the senior commander and
     manders and staff, the deputy should stay in             his staff- The SJA         is accustomed to in-
     the office to insure that all assigned tasks and         volvement in all aspects Of the Office Operation
     missions are completed on time. On the other             may feel uncomfortable sharing his supervisory
     hand, the SJA may see his place at his desk              responsibilities, but other demands on his time
     closely supervising the daily operation of the           dictate the          make as        management
     office. In determining how he will respond to            decisions as possible-
     the work habits of the SJA, the deputy should
     follow the old management maxim, that a sub-
     ordinate should do best what his boss likes to            111. THE DEPU”Y’s 1WAGEMENT
     do least.                                                        RESPONSIBILITIES
                                                                I have suggested the deputy should “run the
                                                              office,” but what does this entail? I see three
       11. ESTABLISHING THE DEPUTY                            major areas of responsibility: personnel man-
P                  ROLE                                       agement, office administration, and work prod-
                                                              uct review. Personnel management includes in-
       While the relationship between the SJA and             volvement in the multitude of personnel prob-
     deputy is largely a matter of prior experiences          lems that can arise in an office with a large
     and personalities, there are standard manage-            staff, and the administration of policies and
     ment concepts that should be applied. The dep-           procedures which will affect these individuals.
     uty must be prepared at any time to assume the           The most critical decisions, such as officer as-
     duties of the SJA. Whether because of illness,           signments, will be made by the SJA, but he will
     leave, or official business, the SJA is often            not have time to deal personally with the less
     absent for a period of days or even weeks.               important personnel problems.
     These absences will require an informed deputy
     aware of the cases and actions that must be                 Although the deputy’s role will require con-
     processed. Also, the deputy must occasionally            stant involvement, he must fully utilize the
     participate as the SJA representative at staff           subordinate supervisors who have the initial
     and committee meetings, and he must develop              authority to solve personnel problems. These
     a good working relationship with the Com-                immediate supervisors should be able to expect
     mander, the Chief of Staff, and headquarters             that both the SJA and the deputy will avoid
     staff. The deputy who develops the confidence            interfering with the relationship the supervisor
     of commanders and staff will be filling his job          has established with his subordinates. For this
     properly. At all times, though, he should re-            reason the deputy should not, except in unusual
     member he is not the S A . Temporary SJA                 circumstances, correct or reprimand without
     absences do not mean that major offke policies           first discussing the particular problem with the
     axe changed, or controversial opinions ren-              immediate supervisor.
     dered, if they can wait until the SJA returns.
     Nor should the deputy attempt to “outshine”                Even though the deputy should not usurp his
(?   the SJA during these absences. The deputy                supervisors’ responsibilities, he should become
DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     20
familiar with the work of all office personnel.           stitutional memory that is so necessary to ex-
To assist him in learning the role of each indi-          peditiously perform the required legal work.
vidual, an office SOP must list the required
tasks for each position. The interest the deputy             The movement of the legal actions through
shows in the work of all personnel will likely be         the office is the responsibility of the warrant
reflected in higher morale and efficiency.                officer or the senior noncommissioned officer.
Whether military or civilian, officer or enlisted,        This individual must meticulously check all
there is a positive response from subordinates            work leaving the office for proper format,
when they sense his concern about their work.             punctuation, and spelling, and more impor-
Encouraging communication within the office               tantly must monitor all suspenses to insure
also serves to prevent minor irritants or mis-            work is completed in a timely fashion. The
understandings from becoming major problems.              deputy must work closely with this admin tech-
It is particularly important that the deputy              nician to establish a procedure that minimizes
have time available for counseling and advising           the number of administrative errors, yet also
the military lawyers. The deputy may assist in            provides a support system that allows the
solving difficult legal questions by sharing his          lawyer to spend maximum time and effort on
knowledge and experience with those seeking               legal research, analysis, and presentation. To
his help.                                                 meet this goal the office must possess modern
                                                          word processing equipment, a current library
                                                          and a facility which creates the professional
  Counseling is also required when conduct and            atmosphere conducive to quality legal work.
efficiency do not meet acceptable standards.              The deputy and the admin technician must
Whether this counseling is conducted by the
                                                          utilize the budget process and their creative
SJA, the deputy, or direct supervisor, it must            talents to establish a smoothly functioning of-
be handled with firmness and should be timely.
Most people prefer frequent appraisal of their            fice.
performance rather than being told at the end                But while managing people and administer-
of an official rating period that their work is           ing the paper flow through the office are impor-
considered substandard. The deputy should at-             tant, they are not “lawyer’s’’ jobs. I t is the
tempt to set a tone for fairness in handling              third major area of the deputy’s responsibilities
disciplinary problems. When supervisors ap-               - work product review - that requires the
pear unreasonable, efficiency declines. The               training and legal knowledge of an experienced
deputy’s role is to make sure that neither per-           lawyer. With perhaps a few exceptions in the
sonality conflicts, nor ineffective supervision           area of military justice (e.g., matters dealing
interfere with the office mission.                        with the defense counseVSJA relationship, such
                                                          as pre-trial agreements and discharge pending
   Managing people is an important aspect of              court-martial charges), all actions to be signed
the deputy job, but unless the administration of          by the SJA or for the SJA, should first be
the office is sound, the most competent em-               reviewed by the deputy. This procedure has
ployee will be inefficient. The need for a cur-           several advantages. First, it lends additional
rent and practical SOP cannot be overem-                  support to the position or answer proposed by
phasized. This SOP should not only list the               the action officer and branch chief, if the dep-
individual tasks to be performed by each per-             uty has had the opportunity to ask hard ques-
son, but must also establish the procedures to            tions and challenge the analysis. He is serving
follow when handling both routine and unusual             in the role of “devil’s advocate”, challenging
actions, and should include a compilation of              and testing to make sure an opinion is well
standard forms and letters frequently used.               developed and legally sound. At the same time,
With the constant personnel changes found in a            checking the details and the legal reasoning will
military legal office, a well-conceived SOP pro-          likely protect the less experienced officer from
vides not only the structure, but also the in-            embarrassing mistakes identified by the SJA, a
                                                                                         DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                    21
commander, or staff section. Secondly, this re-          each deputy will encounter. Because of the
view is consistent with ‘the training responsi-          heavy volume of actions that must be reviewed,
bility of the SJA. Inexperienced lawyers will            for example, it is a,major effort to identify
develop their skills more rapidly when required          errors of form and substance. Even the most
to present their actions for review to a deputy          experienced lawyers make mistakes, so the
who has set high standards of professional ex-           deputy’s scrutiny is critical. Time must be
cellence .                                               found for more than a cursory review.
   A third reason for the deputy to conduct this           Personnel turbulance is another problem that
review is it provides him with the day-to-day            constantly creates difficulties within the office.
knowledge of the office work product (whether            A l t h o u g h t h e p r e s e n t A r m y policy of
it be legal assistance letters, approved claims,         lengthening assignments has partially al-
or military justice statistics) which is required        leviated this situation, the continuing require-
for him to properly manage the office. More              ment to train new people remains. Even those
importantly, it allows him to remain informed            with prior experience in the same or similar
on all actions so that he can provide the neces-         jobs will need an initial period to adjust to
sary advice during periods when the SJA i s              office procedures and policies. I t is important
absent.                                                  that sufficient guidance and support be pro-
                                                         vided to make this transition quickly and
   The fact the deputy reviews the actions does          smoothly. The deputy should make a special
not mean they must be seen in draft format-              effort to introduce the new military lawyer to
that will be determined by many factors, such            the office work and social environment.
as the type of action, the experience and com-
petency of the action officer and branch chief,             The deputy position that has been described
and the wishes of the SJA. In whatever form              is both demanding and responsible. If an indi-
the review is made, however, it should be con-           vidual is to succeed in the job, he must be
ducted as a learning tool to develop the less            organized and should have the ability to shift
experienced officer, and to make sure the qual-          concentration quickly from one subject to
ity of the office work remains high. Details             another. If the claims, legal assistance, admin-
must be checked and reasoning challenged if              istrative law decisions, and various military
this review is to be more than merely another            justice questions are to be promptly reviewed,
step that slows the processing time of the ac-           periods of the day must be found when this
tion. The more critical the review, the more             time-consuming, but all-important, function is
careful the action officer will likely be in sub-        performed. Hours beyond the normal duty day
mitting a “final product.’’ Attention to detail          are often required, but the professional satis-
should be part of this review, but the deputy            faction and growth to be gained make the time
must not make changes for the sake of                    well spent.
change-this only frustrates subordinates.

                                                                       V. CONCLUSION
   IV. COMMON PROBLEM AREAS
                                                            I have suggested that the job of deputy staff
  This discussion has emphasized an active and           judge advocate is neither understood nor pop-
broad role for the deputy. Hopefully, this               ular. It must be recognized, however, that the
model will assist in creating a smoothly                 positions will be filled. Those who receive the
operating legal office with few difficulties or          assignment should view it as a great profes-
crises. But even the most well organized and             sional challenge. The opportunity to .be in-
managed organization will face problems and              volved in all aspects of the military practice of
demands that test both its structure and its             law should be a refreshing change, particularly
people. There are some common problems that              if the career pattern of specialization has been
DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     22




maximum responsibility and performs with en-              cate General’s School, Charlottesville, Virginia, 1974-
thusiasm, dedication, and skill will find the job         1977. B.S.,1963, Texas Christian University; J.D., 1966,
rewarding. His contribution to the office should          Southern Methodist University. Member of the Bars of
                                                          Texas, the United States Court of Military Appeals, and
           be reflected in            and sound           the United States Supreme Court. Author of .?A Pracli-
lega1 support provided to commanders and                  ea1 Guide to Federal Civilian Employee Disciplinary
staff.                                                    Actions, 77 MIL. L. REV.65 (1977).




              INTERNATIONAL LAW-THE ROLE OF THE LEGAL
                 ADVISER, AND LAW OF WAR INSTRUCTION
  Major James A . Burger, Chief, International Law Division, The Judge Advocate General’s
                            School, Charlottesville, Virginia *

  Two articles of particular importance to the            forces.‘ He says that this resulted in the
judge advocate officer interested in the law of           appearance of “Manuals” issued by States. The
war have appeared in the January-February                 second stage of development came with the
issue of the International Review of the Red              requirement in the Geneva Conventions of 1949              /“
Cross. The first is b y G.I.A.D. Draper on the            that the Contracting Parties disseminate the
“role of the legal advisers in armed forces.”l            text of the conventions and include their study
The second is by Lieutenant Colonel Frederic              in programs of military and, if possible, civilian
de Mulinen, and is entitled “The Law of War               instruction.5 This is a progression from the
and the Armed Forces.”2 Both articles address             requirement that there be Manuals to a re-
significant developments in the law of war.               quirement that there be programs of instruc-
                                                          tion.
   First, t h e r e i s t h e article b y G.I.A.D.
Draper. Colonel Draper is an old friend of the             The third stage comes in the new Protocols.
JAG Corps and has visited the School on a                 Article 82 provides that:
number of occasions. He served as a Senior
War Crimes Prosecutor for Great Britain fol-                  The High Contracting Parties at all
lowing the Second World War, and is now a                   times, and the Parties to the Conflict in
                                                            time of armed conflict,’shall ensure that
Professor of Law at the University of Sussex in
England. He is a consultant to the Interna-                 legal advisers are available, when neces-
                                                            sary, to advise military commanders a t the
tional Committee of the Red Cross and is a
frequent publicist on law of war matters. In his            appropriate level of the application of the
article he notes the new provision of the Pro-              Conventions and of this Protocol and on the
tocols to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 on the             appropriate instruction to be given to the
employment of legal advisers by military com-               armed forces on this subject.6
m a n d e r ~ This is a new requirement. It was
              .~                                          Colonel Draper states that he feels this provi-
not contained in the 1949 Conventions.                    sion, though modest, to be practical, and that
                                                          the presence of legal advisers will be a valuable
  G.I.A.D. Draper traces the development of
this new provision from Article 1 of Hague                modality for implementation of the Conventions
Convention No. IV of 1907 which required that             and Protocol I.
belligerents “issue instructions” to their armed            Colonel Draper notes two problems in fulfil-
                                                                                               18




                                                                                            DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                         23
     ling this new obligation. The first is the prob-         commanders upon the general application of the
     lem of having the trained legal personnel avail-         Conventions of the Protocol, 2 ) advise com-
     able. It should not be a problem for nations like        manders in time of armed conflict upon those
     the United States which have large resources             parts which deal with military operations, and
     of qualified legal personnel, but for other na-          3) upon the instruction to be given in the armed
     tions it may be a problem. Yet, Colonel Draper           forces on these instruments.*
     feels that most States do have legal advisers
     available for disciplinary matters, and the re-             He says that there is plenty of work to be
                                                              done both in training the needed personnel and
     quirement is not unreasonable.
                                                              in getting them involved in the areas where
       The second problem is one of acceptance.               they are needed. Colonel Draper is very hope-
     Colonel Draper states that in totalitarian re-           ful that this new implementation provision will
     gimes legal advisers may be no more than a               be of some consequence. He says that the use
     smoke-screen for persistent illegality. Even the         of legal advisers “may give the Conventions
     Gestapo had its “doctors of law.” But, more              and the Protocols a significance and a relevance
     perplexing is negligence in this regard by               in armed conflict” which has not up to this time
     democratic countries. He cites the case of               been otherwise achieved.@
     Ireland v. the United Kingdom, decided by the
     European Commission of Human Rights in                     The second article concerns the training to be
     1976,’ a case involving allegations of torture in        given in armed forces on the law of war.l0 It
     the interrogation of prisoners in Northern Ire-          follows in reasonable progression after the arti-
                                                              cle by Colonel Draper. The author, LTC de
     land. Strangely, no legal advice seems to have
     been sought by any of the Government agencies            Mulinen, is also a friend of The JAG School. He
     involved.                                                works for the International Red Cross and is
P                                                             presently assigned duties with the Institute of
                                                              Humanitarian Law at San Remo, Italy. In this
       Part of the problem of acceptance may be
     solved by legal advisers being able to speak the         capacity he has been the prime mover behind
     same language as their commanders and being              the International Law of War Course for Offi-
     able to understand their problems. They must             cers being given at that Institute. He also has
     also be a permanent part of their staff so that          had the opportunity to visit the JAG School in
     they are integrally involved in planning and             May of 1978 to lecture and describe his efforts
     operations. Then, there is the level at which            on law of war training.
     they will be placed. Colonel Draper says legal             In his article Colonel de Mulinen notes that
     advice should n o t b e s o much t h e o v e r           armed conflicts as well as the rules governing
     dramatized “DOwe launch a weapon on that                 armed conflict are becoming more and more
     target or not”, but an involvement on a level            complex. He believes therefore in the need to
     where plans and tactical directives can be               establish priorities, and methods for creditable
     reviewed before the engagement.                          teaching. He writes that:
        The legal adviser must be involved in this              Men trained to do battle and ready if need
     “vetting” of plans and directives in time of               be to lay down their lives in the accom-
     peace as well as in war. He should also be a               plishment of military duty do not wish to
     part of exercises on any large scale. He should            be encumbered with regulations which to
     be attached at crucial levels of command, and              their minds are just fanciful theories prop-
     he should monitor all directives and standing              ounded by jurists with no idea of military
     instructions as a matter of routine. Then, there           realities .I1
     is also the duty to advise on and be involved in
     instruction.                                             The problem he addresses then is similar to
                                                              what Colonel Draper was concerned with when
       Colonel Draper summarizes the duty of the              he spoke about the acceptance of the role of the
fl   legal adviser under Article 82 to: 1) advise             legal adviser.
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                       r‘
                                                    24
  Colonel de Mulinen notes first that members            success. It is a method of teaching which
of the armed forces are more likely to accept            involves the students in the problem being
ideas put forward if the expressions used are            presented.
familiar to them. The legal adviser must talk in
                                                            One last effort noted by Colonel de Mulinen
military language. Secondly, it is helpful to
                                                         is that his Institute carried out some practical
establish priorities. The soldier is more likely
                                                         “tests”15 to verify how well the laws of war
to accept those rules he feels he needs to know          could be carried out on the battlefield. A war
to do his particular job. Some priorities are
                                                         game was played on a mock terrain with sol-
outlined in the Conventions. There are some
rules which are more important than others,              diers, tanks and civilians in between. Quite
and some r u l e s which apply t o specific              frankly, Colonel de Mulinen and his coworkers
                                                         did find difficulties in applying the rules. Yet,
categories of persons such as chaplains or
medical personnel. Then, there are priorities            more than anything else this proved that the
                                                         problems of how to apply the rules must be
which must be spelled out according to specific
levels and functions of military duty.                   addressed before the battle takes place.
                                                            Both of these articles are well worth reading.
  He describes a table of priorities according to        They represent two developments in the law of
specific levels. This table had been previously          war which a r e of worldwide concern. The
outlined at the European Red Cross Seminar               Draper article indicates that the new Protocols
on Dissemination of Knowledge of the Geneva              to the Geneva Conventions will require that
Conventions held at Warsaw in March 1977.12              more be done in regard to legal advice and
The list runs through what is needed to be               training than has been done in the past. Ameri-
known by privates, NCO’s, and by officers from           can judge advocates need to take note of this.
the level of lieutenants to division commanders          The de Mulinen article shows what others are
and higher. He also suggests a list of soldiers’         doing elsewhere in the world in regard to
rules, simple rules which he feels should be             training on the law of war. This is also some-
known by every s01dier.l~                                thing which is well worth considering in regard
   In regard to teaching methodology he distin-          to our own training programs.
guishes what he calls “teaching to convince”
from “teaching properly so called.’’ The one is
oriented to making the soldier believe what is                                 Footnotes
being taught and the other deals with the
application of specific rules. Both must be              *JAGC, U.S. Army. Former deputy judge advocate,
                                                         NATOBHAPE Support Group (U.S.), HQ, SHAPE, Bel-
accomplished if law of war training is to be             gium 1970-1974. B.A., St. Peter‘s College, 1965; J.D.,
effective. They may be accomplished by books,            Villanova University School of Law, 1968; M.A., Boston
lectures or films, or by incorporation into exer-        University, 1974; LL.M., University of Virginia School of
cises or the actual performance of duty.                 Law, 1978.

   In regard to teaching to convince, Colonel de         1G.I.A.D. Draper, “Role of Legal Advisers in Armed
                                                         Forces,” 202 INT’L REV. OF THE RED CROSS6 (Jan.-Feb.
Mulinen cites some of his experience from his            1978).
course in San Remo. He notes that the students
                                                         *F. de Mulinen, “The Law of War and the Armed Forces,”
gather together in small groups to apply the             202 INT’L REV. OF THE RED CROSS 18 (Jan.-Feb. 1978).
rules to specific problems. He gives as an
example what he calls a “Dual Action Exercise:           sArt. 82 of Protocol I, Diplomatic Conference on Reaffirm-
                                                         ation and Development of International Humanitarian Law
Alpha-land at War with Betaland.”I4 He pro-              Applicable in Armed Conflict: Protocols I and I1 to the
ceeds through an actual tactical exercise where          Geneva Conventions, 16 INTERNATIONAL        LEGAL MATE-
law of war problems are raised as the exercise           RIALS 1391 (vol. 6, Nov. 1977).
is carried out. He did, I might add, carry out           ‘Art. 1, Hague Convention No. IV, Respecting the Laws
such an exercise while he visited at The JAG             and Customs of War on Land, Oct. 18, 1907, 36-Stat. 2277,
School in May. This exercise was a great                 T.S. No. 639.                                                r
                                                                                                       DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                               25
    6Common articles 47/48/127 and 144 of the Geneva Conven-        ‘Draper, eupra n.1 at 14. This case is discussed at length
    tiona of 1949.                                                  in an International Affairs Note prepared by International
        Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the               Law Division, OTJAG, in THE ARMYLAWYER,         July 1978,
        Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed                  at 32.
         Forces in the Field, Aug. 12, 1949, U.S.T. 3114,           ODraper, supra n.1 at 14.
        T.I.A.S. No. 3362, 75 U.N.T.S. 31; Geneva Con-
        vention for the Amelioration of the Condition of            @Zd.
        the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of
        the Armed Forces at Sea, Aug. 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T.            ‘Ode Mulinen, supra n.2.
        3217, T.I.A.S. No. 3363, 76 U.N.T.S. 85; Geneva             “Zd. at 19.
         Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prison-
        ers on W a r , Aug. 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T. 3316,                IaZd. at 26.
         T.I.A.S. No. 3364, 76 U.N.T.S. 287 [hereinafter            1aZd. at 27.
         cited aa GPW Convention]; Geneva Convention
         Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in          “Zd. at 33.
        Time of War, Aug. 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T. 3516,
         T.I.A.S. No. 3365, 76 U.N.T.S. 287.                        ’&Id.,37-43.

    =Supra, n.3.


                                         Professional Responsibility
                                         Criminal Law Division, OTJAG

      Recently The Judge Advocate General con-                         than a lowly dishonest welsher. Such con-
    sidered a case in which CPT T, a Legal Assist-                     duct is not befitting of any individual in the

‘
r   ance Officer, wrote the following letter on
    behalf of his client:
                                                                       U.S. Army particularly an individual
                                                                       holding your rank. Should you fail to act on
                                                                       this matter, I will do everything in my
      Dear Specialist H:
                                                                       power to insure that your actions will have
         I have been consulted as an attorney and                      an adverse effect on your military career.
      Legal Assistance Officer by SSG W re-                            Also, I will do everything within my power
      garding the promissory note which you                            to insure that my client in some manner i s
      signed on 15 October 1976, obligating you                        returned the $2,400.00 which is justly due
      to pay $2,400.00 in $100.00 monthly in-                          him.
      stallments. Since signing this note, my
      client has not received one cent of the                             This letter is written on behalf of my
      money that you owe him for the automobile                        client, SSG W. As such, it reflects my
      which he transferred to you. My client’s                         personal and considered judgment as an
      attorney previously wrote you a letter                           individual member of the legal profession
      which you did not respond. On behalf of my                       and is not to be construed as an official
      client, I must demand payment of this                            view of this headquarters, the US. Army,
      money justly due to him.                                         or the U.S.Government.
         I must advise you of your responsibilities                                                            Sincerely,
      under AR 635-200, Chapter 13 and the fact
      that you could be eliminated from the
      service for indebtedness. My client would                        1 Incl                                    [CPT TI
      have legal remedies against you for failing                      Promissory note
      to pay this promissory note when due. My
      client in good faith transferred to you an                      In response to this letter, CPT F, JAGC, on
      automobile and your actions since that time                   behalf of his client, SP 6 H,wrote the follow-
      have shown yourself to be nothing more                        ing:
DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                26
 Dear CPT T:                                           misrepresentations of your client, SSG W.
                                                       Your file is also inaccurate in that SP5 has
    This letter is written on behalf of my
                                                       responded to all inquiries from your office
 client, SP5 H, in response to your letter of
                                                       (See Incl 3).
 6 April 1978.
                                                         Therefore, it is demanded that you re-
    In October 1976, SP5 H agreed to pur-              tract your scurrilous letter of 6 April 1978
 chase SSG W’s 1975 Ford Mustang for an                by formal letter through the same channels
 agreed purchase price of $3,700.00. SP5 H             to which it was issued.
 paid $1,300.00 in cash towards the pur-
 chase price, thus leaving a balance due of                                      Very truly yours,
 $2,400.00. However, there was an existing
 lien on the POV in the amount of approxi-
 mately $4,500.00; Service Federal Credit              3 Incls                             [CPT Fl
 Union, Pirmasens Branch Office, APO                   as
 New York 09189, is lienholder. The Credit
 Union was not willing to finance the POV              This letter is written on behalf of my
 in any amount above red book value, i.e.,             client, SP5 H. As such, it reflects my
 $3,700.00. Since neither party could pay off          personal and considered judgment as an
 SSG Ws note, or apply an amount in cash               individual member of the legal profession
 in order to bring the note down to accept-            and is not to be construed as an official
 able refinancing limitations, the parties             view of this headquarters, the United
 agreed to the following accommodation:                States Army, or the United States Gov-
 SP5 H signed a promissory note in the                 ernment .
 amount of $2,400.00 agreeing to pay
 $100.00 per month. It was further agreed              Because of the unprofessional language used
 that this amount would be paid to SSG W’s           by CPT T in his letter to SP5 H, he was given
 account at the Credit Union (See Incls 1            an administrative letter of reprimand.
 and 2). However, since SSG W’s monthly                 Conduct similar to this has been condemned
 payments were $160.00 per month, SSG W              previously (The Army Lawyer, May 1977, p.
 agreed to make $60.00 per month payments             19). In addition, signing such a letter is in
 to his account. SP5 H kept his part of the          conflict with Ethical Consideration 7-10,
 bargain and promptly initiated an allot-            American Bar Association Code of Professional
 ment payable to SSG W’s account in the              Responsibility which provides: “The duty of a
 amount of $100.00 per month. However,               lawyer to represent his client with zeal does
 SSG W did not make the agreed supple-               not militate against his concurrent obligation to
 mental payment of $60.00 per month. The             treat with consideration all persons involved in
 Credit Union, therefore, threatened to re-          the legal process and to avoid the infliction of
 possess the POV. This matter apparently             needless harm.” CAPT T’s approach to the
 has been straightened out and SP5 H now             problem demonstrated a failure to distinguish
 owes $1,200.00 on the promissory note,              between the functions of representation and of
 which will be paid off in October 1978 as           judging a cause. The perceived merit of a
 required. In addition, SSG W must make              client’s cause can never justify CPT T’s con-
 arrangements to sign all instruments                duct.
 transferring the POV to SP5 H.
                                                       In addition, CPT F’s letter of response which
   Since both parties agreed that the pro-           referred to CPT T’s “scurrilous” letter of 6
 ceeds of the promissory note would be paid          April 1978, was considered ill-advised. His
 to SSG Ws loan account at the Credit                supervising staff judge advocate was directed
 Union, and this has been done, it appears           to counsel him concerning his use of intemper-
 your letter of 6 April 1978 is based upon           ate language.
                                                                                              DA Pam 27-50-69
f
1-1
                                                           27
        This case illustrates t h e importance of               guage and the pitfalls of basing action on
      avoiding unprofessional and intemperate lan-              unverified information supplied by a client.


                         ADMINISTRATIVE AND CIVIL LAW SECTION
                              Administrative and Civil Law Division, TJAGSA
         The Judge Advocate General’s Opinions
                -                                               ward Area Alerting Radar, the enlistee still
                                                                received his promised training and his failure in
      ’* (Duty Status) Current Amy
                                                                the additional training phase, which precluded
      Do Not           Authorize “Flagging” Of A                award of the anticipated MOS, did not establish
               lMember For           To &Ieet Army              a breach of enlistment agreement by the Army.
      Height and Weight Standards. DAJA-AL
      1978/2837, 7 June 1978. In response to an
                                                                3. (Enlisted Personnel, Enlisted Reserve)
      inquiry from MILPERCEN, The Judge Advo-
                                                                F a i l u r e to Comply With Procedural Re-
      cate General concluded that neither Army
                                                                quirements of Army Regulation 135-91 In
      Regulation 600-31 (Suspension of Favorable
                                                                Ordering ARNGUS Member To Involuntary
      Personnel Actions) nor Army Regulation 600-9              Active Duty Voids T h e Order. DAJA-AL
      (The Army Physical Fitness and Weight Con-
                                                                1978/2562, 14 Apr. 1978. An ARNGUS enlistee
      trol Program) authorized “flagging” solely for            who was given permission to transfer to a new
      failure to meet height and weight standards.
                                                                unit neglected to do so and was ordered to
      However, where other action is contemplated,              involuntary active duty. He failed to report as
      such as administrative elmination, Army Reg-              ordered, was apprehended and charged with
      ulation 630-31 authorizes the suspension of               AWOL. However, because of procedural ir-
      favorable personnel action.                               regularities in the activation process, criminal
                                                                proceedings were abated and MILPERCEN
        2. (Enlistment and Induction-Enlistment) An
                                                                was asked to direct separation under AR 635-
        Enlistee Whose Promised Course of Instruc-              200, Chapter 5 (lack of jurisidiction).
        tion Is Broadened To Encompass Additional
       Skills Has No Basis To Claim An Unfulfilled                In response to a MILPERCEN inquiry, The
       Enlistment Commitment. Additionally, Even                Judge Advocate General stated the opinion that
       Though He Fails to Successfully Complete                 no AWOL offense occured because the service
       The Course of Instruction, All Other Enlist-             member received no actual or constructive
        m e n t Promises Remain Valid. DAJA-AL                  notice of the orders to active duty until he was
        197812512, 9 May 1978. Where an enlistee was            apprehended by civil authorities and returned
       promised both an MOS producing course Nul-               to military control. Although constructive
        can System Mechanic) and a unit of choice (1st          notice may be effected by mailing the orders,
        Cavalry Division), the promises are unrelated           with return receipt requested, to the last ad-
        and each can be enforced separately. Thus,              dress furnished by the member, in this case the
       when the enlistee fails to complete the prom-            orders were misaddressed and there was no
        ised MOS course, he must still be assigned to           evidence that they were mailed. However, if
        his unit of choice unless that MOS i an abso-
                                             s                  the orders were otherwise valid, jurisdiction
        lute prerequisite to every assignment in the            would have attached when actual notice of the
        unit. Here, The Judge Advocate General ex-              orders was received upon apprehension and
        pressed the opinion that it was probable that           return to military control, and release for lack
        the enlistee could hold some position in the 1st        of jurisdiction would be inappropriate.
      . Cavalry Division.                                         In this case, though, the orders were invalid
        Also, where the Vulcan System Mechanic                  because the member was not informed of his
      course was expanded to include repair of For-             right to appeal the involuntary activation.
p“
DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                   28
When the unit commander prepared the origi-             requested to disclose information of prior con-
nal documentation in September 1976, it was a           victions as part of the process.
duty of the area commander to give notice of
appeal rights. However, in October 1976, while          5. (Information and Records, Release and Ac-
the documentation was lost in the unit mail-            cess) A processing Office Must Make A pre-
room, AR 135-91 was changed to place this               liminary Determination Regarding Releasea-
duty on the unit commander. Upon rediscovery            bility Before Referral Of A FOIA Request To
in March 1977, the documentation was simply                  Initial ~       ~Authority, DAJA-AL 1978/
                                                                                   ~       i      ~      l
forwarded by the new unit commander without             2535, 20 Apr. 1978. A request under the Free-
providing notice of appeal rights. Nor did the          dom of Information Act for copies of three
area commander provide such notice prior to                     training video tapes was foMTarded by
issuing the orders. Accordingly, the orders             the receiving office to the Initial Denial Au-
were void and the member must be released               thority        review and final action,pJThe letter
from military custody and control. This action,         of transmittal indicated that the receiving of-
           does not prevent the Army from               fice had determined only that the films had not
enforcing any reserve obligations still remain-         been approved for public exhibition by the
ing or from                the member under             Department of the Army as required by regula-
appropriate reserve regulation.                         tion. In returning the request to the receiving
                                                        office, The Judge Advocate General advised
4. (Idormation  and Records, General) Service           that a receiving office must make a preliminary
Members ~          ~to Provide Information Of
                            ~       ~       i           decision before referral of a request under the
                                                           ~         ~        d
prior Convictions       Obligated T~ ~         i        Freedom of Information Act to an Initial Denial
                                                             ~         ~        l       ~        ~         ~
A Conviction(s) Set Aside up Federal Youth              Authority. The preliminary determination must
Corrections Act, 10 U.S. $8 5005-5024 (19’76).          be ‘whether a                   exemption
DAJA-AL 1978/2358, 19 Apr, 1978. A command              and a legitimate purpose would be served by
SJA requested an opinion whether a service              withholding. The Judge Advocate General also
member who is required to provide information           noted that as the Freedom of Information Act,
of prior convictions is obligated to disclose           5 U.S.C. 5 552, as implemented, governs the
information of prior convictions which have             releasability of Army records, release will not
been set aside U p 18 U.S,C. 5021 (1976). This          be delayed subject to clearance requirements
statute provides pertinently:                           prescribed by other regulatory authority.
  Where a          Offender has been ’laced On          6. (Information and Records, Release and Ac-
  probation by the court, the court may
  therafter, in its discretion, unconditionally         cess) Unclassified Weapons Systems Progress
  discharge such youth offender from proba-             Reports Are Releasable. DAJA-AL 1977/6235,
                                                        4 Jan. 1978. The Judge Advocate General ad-
  tion prior to the expiration of the maximum
  period of probation theretofore fixed by              vised that weekly Significant Activities reports
  the court, which discharge shall automati-            published by a Research and Development
  cally set aside the conviction and the court          Command are releasable under the Freedom of
  shall issue to the youth offender, a certifi-         Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (1976). Among
  cate to that effect.                                  other items of information, the publications
                                                        contained interim progress reports on weapons
  Recognizing that several courts have adopted          systems under evaluation and development;
the position that action under the section pre-         however, they were unclassified: I t was noted
cludes disclosure of the conviction, TJAG ad-           that the reports constituted “records” within
vised that a conviction which has been set aside        the meaning of the Act; the Command’s charac-
under the Federal Youth Corrections Act must            terization of the published reports as “working
be disclosed by an appIicant for enlistment,            notes” was rejected. Neither was the potential
appointment or commission in the Army who is            for future security classification following addi-
                                                                                       DA P a m 27-50-69
                                                    29
tional development considered a basis for                accept written directives from patients for the
exemption from disclosure U P 5 U.S.C.                   withholding or withdrawal of life-sustaining
0 552(b) (1976).                                         procedures in the event of a terminal illness.
                                                         The proposal was for the Army regulation to
7. (Military Installations, Federal Magistrate)          operate only in states which had legalized the
Nonregular Army Judge Advocates Should                   use of such directives. Specifically, The Sur-
Not Be Routinely Appointed As Special As-                geon General requested review of the Texas
sistant United States Attorneys. DAJA-AL                 Natural Death Act with a view toward initially
1977/6198, 17 Jan 1978. A staff judge advocate           authorizing the filing of directives to physicians
requested concurrence in seeking appointment             in the medical records of patients in medical
as Special Assistant to the United States At-            treatment facilities located in Texas.
torney of a nonregular Army JAG officer and                 The Judge Advocate General advised that
an opinion regarding the legaility of appointing         the only possible uniform rule for dealing with
a regular Army JAG officer as special Assistant          such directives to physicians is to prohibit their
to the United States Attorney. The staff judge           use in Army medical treatment facilities. The
advocate was advised of an earlier opinion               Judge Advocate General recommended a regu-
(DAJA-AL 1976/6127, 3 Jan 1977) in which The             lation to that Affect. Several reasons were
Judge Advocate General stated that the ap-               advanced for this position.
pointment of a regular Army JAG officer risks
a violation of 0 10 U.S.C. 973. A violation of              First, medical treatment facilities may be
this statute may result in the loss of the               located on land under various kinds of federal
commission of a regular Army officer. There-             legislative jurisdiction. It is likely, but not
fore, regular Army JAG Officers should not be            certain, that in a t least some cases, in the
utilized as Special Assistant United States              absence of a criminal immunity provision such
Attorneys.                                               as in the Texas Natural Death Act, the deliber-
                                                         ate withholding or withdrawal of medical atten-
  The Judge Advocate General then advised
                                                         tion resulting in the death of a patient would be
that, as a matter of policy, nonregular Army
                                                         a criminal homicide under both state and fed-
judge advocates should not routinely be ap-
pointed as Special Assistant United States               eral law. Protection afforded under a state
                                                         statute such as the Texas Natural Death Act
attorneys. Such an appointment is not neces-
                                                         would not afford criminal immunity under the
sary for a judge advocate to prosecute petty
offenses before a United States magistrate.              specific federal statutes against homicide in
Where local United States attorneys express              areas of exclusive federal or concurrent (or,
                                                         perhaps, partial) legislative jurisdiction. See 18
doubts about allowing judge advocates to pros-
ecute, the staff judge advocate should suggest           U.S.C. 0 1111-1113 (1976). Statutes such as the
that he seek guidance from his superiors in the          Texas Natural Death Act cannot affect these
                                                         federal statutes because the State of Texas
Department o f Justice.
                                                         cannot change federal laws. Because legislative
                                                         jurisdiction varies from post to post and from
8. (Military Installations, Legislative Jurisdic-        tract to tract within a particular post, a uni-
tion) Army Medical Treatment Facilities Or               form policy to adopt a state statute such as the
Their Personnel Should Be Prohibited From                Texas Natural Death Act is impossible.
Honoring Directives To Physicians Request-
ing Withholding Or Withdrawal Of Life-                     Second, such statutes as the Texas Natural
Sustaining Procedures For The Terminally                 Death Act may depend on the status of the
Ill. DAJA-AL 1978/2402, 8 May 1978. The                  physician in question. With regard to civilian
Judge Advocate General recently rendered an              doctors, the applicability of a statute such as
opinion on a proposal by the Surgeon General of          the Texas Natural Death Act would depend on
the Army to promulgate an Army regulation                the nature of jurisdiction over the place and
permitting Army medical treatment facilities to          whether the doctor is covered by Texas law.
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                              7
                                                   30
The Texas Natural Death Act defines “physi-             States. Second, the EM seeking remission must
cian” as a physician or surgeon licensed by the         fall within the jurisdiction of the Secretary con-
Texas State Board of Medical Examiners. A               cerned. Third, the department must have
civilian licensed by another state working in a         jurisdiction over the debt itself.
medical treatment facility in Texas would not
be considered a physician for purposes of the             The third factor is the only factor in issue in
Texas Natura] Death Act. With regard to a               the instant situation. Whenever vehicle damage
military doctor, the applicability of the Texas         results through misconduct 01 improper opera-
Natural Death Act also depends on the nature            tion by an employee, the agency employing the
of jurisdiction Over the place and may also             vehicle operatator is financially responsible
require that the military doctor be licensed in         under 41 C.F.R. § 101-39.704. See 41 C.F.R.
the state. The problem is further complicated           § 101-39.807.
because the military doctor is subje’ct to the            The         is finanbia]ly responsible for the
                 f
Uniform Code O Military Justice and it has not          damage. Therefore, the debt is one within the
been authoritatively decided whether allowing           jurisdiction of the Secretary for remission or
a patient to die in compliance with such a              cancellationaction.
statute as the Texas Natural Death Act would
be a crime under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice. That the act would not be a crime              10. (Prohibited Activities and Standards of
under the law of the state is immaterial. Thus,         Conduct, General) Individual Membership In
a military doctor could be subject to prosecu-          A Private Organization May Not Be Pur-
tion for homicide regardless of whether he W=           chased With Appropriated Funds. DAJA
licensed in Texas and regardless of the nature          197812734, 8 June 1978. The Judge Advocate
of the jurisdiction over the medical treatment          General was requested to render an opinion on        /r‘
facility where the act occurred. Based on these         the legality of a command purchasing from ap-
reasons, The Judge Advocate General Con-                propriated funds an individual membership in a
cluded that the only possible uniform rule for          private organization. The private organization
dealing with statutes such as the Texas Natural         did not allow institutional memberships and its
Death Act is to prohibit their use in Army              by-laws did not authorize transfer of member-
medical treatment facilities.                           ship from one individual to another. The com-
                                                        mand intended to treat the individual member-
9. (Pecuniary Liability) Service Secretary May          ship as vested in the position rather than the
Remit O Cancel Indebtedness Of Member
         r                                              individual because membership would be more
Resulting From Damage To GSA Vehicle.                   beneficial to the command in accomplishing its
DAJA-AL 1977/5520, 4 Oct. 1977. SGT L dam-              mission than to the individual.
aged a GSA vehicle while the assigned driver.
A Report of Survey investigation revealed that             Under 5 U.S.C. 5946, paying fees for indi-
“inattentive driving” was the cause of the acci-        vidual membership in a private organization
dent. SGT L was found pecuniarily liable and            out of appropriated funds is prohibited. The
sought remission or cancellation of the debt by         Comptroller General has interpreted this pro-
the Secretary of the Army.                              hibition as requiring a membership to be both
                                                        principally for the benefit of government and in
  Para. 707223, DODPM, states “a Secretary              the institutional name of the government ac-
may not remit a member‘s indebtedness be-               tivity involved in order to be legally acquired
cause of liability for damage to property of            with appropriated funds. It was the opinion of
another service,” and is apparently based on            The Judge Advocate General that the proposed
the language of 43 Comp. Gen. 162 (1963),               membership, even though it is substantively
which cites three primary factors required to           for the principal benefit of the command, is not
give the Secretary power to remit an indebted-          an institutional membership and may not be
ness. First, there must be a debt to the United         paid for with appropriated funds.                    7
F-                                                                                          DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                         31
     11. (Prohibited Activities and Standards of              holders, officers, and employees, and therefore
     Conduct, General) The Conduct of A Lottery               in most cases the corporation would be consid-
     On Government-Owned, Leased, Or Con-                     ered to be employed by the foreign government
     trolled Property I s Prohibited. DAJA 1978/              and not the corporation’s owners, officers or
     2613, 23 May 1978. Para. 2-7, AR 600-50, and             employees. In this case the retired officer was
     para. XIII, DoD Dir. 5500.7 prohibit conduct-            advised that if he owns all, or substantially all,
     ing a lottery on government-owned, leased, or            the outstanding stock of the corporation, it is
     controlled property, to include the sale of lot-         possible that he would be considered a direct
                                                                      I


     tery tickets, except where such activity is spe-         employee of the foreign government and sub-
     cifically approved by the Department of the              ject to the Constitutional restrictions. Addi-
     Army. The Judge Advocate General, in com-                tionally, it was noted that the degree of control
     menting on the legality of granting a request            the foreign government has authority to exer-
     for an exception to the lottery prohibition, ad-         cise over the employees of a cdrporation may be
     vised that there is no legal objection to grant-         looked to in deciding whether the employment
     ing such an exception where the lottery was              involved is with the corporation or the foreign
     being held overseas and would be in accordance           country. (The officer was referred to 53 Comp.
     with the foreign country’s law and thk NATO              Gen. 753 (1974).)
     Status of Forces Agreement.
                                                                 The o&er was advised to seek official ap-
                                                              proval of the proposed corporate contract to
     12. (Prohibited Activities and Standards of              avoid possible loss of retired pay. The request
     Conduct, General) The Owner Of A Corpora-                for approval should contain a detailed descrip-
     tion And His Employees, Who Are Retired                  tion Of the duties to be performed, the source Of
     RA Officers, M~~ Come Under The pmvi-                    compensation to be received, and a statement
     sions Of Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 Of The           signed by the retired member stating that he or
     U n i t 4 States Constitution, DAJA-AL 1978/             she will not be required to execute an oath of
     2479, 5 May 1978. A retired R A officer who              dleidance to the foreign government. It should
     Owns and is president of a research ’services            be sent to: Commander, United States
     corporation, which employs other retired RA              Reserve Components Personnel and Adminis-
     officers, anticipated a contract between his             tration Center, *TTN: AGUZ-RCPD-PAD,
     corporation and a foreign government. He re-             9700 Page Blvd. S k Louis, Missouri 63132.
     quested a clarification of the limitations on re-          Note: detailed guidance regarding requests
     tired regular A m y officers’ employment by a            for approval of foreign government employ-
     foreign government.                                      ment is contained in AR 600-291, 1 July 1978,
        Initially it was pointed out that article I,          effective 1 SePt- 1978.
     section 9, clause 8 of the United States Con-
     stitution prohibits any person holding a posi-           13. (Prohibited Activities and Standards of
     tion of trust or profit under the United States          Canduct, (General) United States Government
     from accepting employment with a foreign gov-            Employees Are Prohibited From Participat-
     ernment without the consent of Congress.-                ing In Gambling Activities While On Duty
     Retired military officers, both regular and-             For The Government. DAJA-AL 1978/1788, 3
     reserve, continue to hold such positions. In             Feb. 1978. The Judge Advocate General was
     addition, the provisions of section 509, Public          queried on the legality of the presence of slot
     Law 95-105, August 17, 1977, authorize retired           machine-type devices in local national canteens.
     Army officers to be employed by foreign gov-             For local national personnel who are U.S. Gov-
     ernments, if approved by both the Secretary of           ernment employees, the opinion was expressed
     the Army and Secretary of State.                         that para. 2-7, AR 600-50, would be appli-
       A corporation is considered to be a legal              cable, prohibiting their participation in gambl-
     entity, separate and distinct from its stock-            ing activities “while on Government-owned,
                                                                                                                 F
DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                      32
controlled, or leased property or otherwise                  TJAG has also advised that a member could
while on duty for the Government . . . . " It              be separated with an other than honorable dis-
was recommended that questions as to the                   charge where, based on a pretrial motion, the
status of the local national employees, the pro-           military judge dismissed charges because the
visions of foreign national labor relation                 government had insufficient evidence after he
agreements, and the effects of SOFA and col-               ruled a confession and identification were in-
lateral international agreements on the issue be           admissable prior to plea by the accused
referred to the Judge Advocate, USAREUR.                   (DAJA-AL 1976/6157, 29 Dec. 1976); where the
                                                           charges were dismissed by the military judge
14. (Separation from the Service) Appellate                for lack of speedy trial ( i d . 1972/4623, 10 July
Court Action Which Set Aside Convictions                   1972), and where there was constructive con-
Because Of Inadequate Providency Inquiry                   donation of desertion ( i d . 1972/4047, 1 May
On Guilty Plea Does Not Preclude Later Ad-                 1972).
ministrative Discharge UP Chapter 13 Or 14,                  Also, withdrawal of charges from trial and
AR 635-200, Under Administrative Double                    dismissal of charges by the convening authority
Jeopardy Rule. DAJA-AL 1978/2322, 12 Apr.                  do not have the effect of an acquittal (JAGA
1978. A number of convictions were set aside               1969/3674, 3 Apr. 1969 (Withdrawal); DAJA-AL
under United States v. Green, 1 M.J. 453                   1973/3564, 1 Mar. 1973 (dismissal following an
(C.M.A. 1976) based on inadequate inquiry by               Article 82 investigation but before referring
the military judge into the providency of guilty           the charges to trial); id., 1977/5067, 16 Aug.
pleas involving pretrial agreements. Rehear-               1977 (dismissal or withdrawal after Article 32
ings were authorized. A field SJA inquired                 investigation, with GCMCA agreeing that
whether the administrative double jeopardy                 there was sufficient evidence to refer the case       /c"
provisions of paragraph l-l9b(l), AR 635-200               to trial) ).
would prohibit separation UP Chapters 13 and
14, AR 635-200 in these cases, L e . , whether               The administrative separation route may be
the appellate action or withdrawal or dismissal            chosen where that action is reasonable, justifi-
of the charges constituted an acquittal or action          able, and supported by the evidence in the file,
having the effect thereof.                                 even though there may be difficulty in obtain-
                                                           ing the testimony of witnesses at a trial by
   OTJAG indicated that neither the action of              court-martial (DAJA-AL 1977/5067; JAGA
the appellate courts nor the withdrawal or dis-            1969/3674).
missal of the charges by the convening author-
ity constitutes an acquittal or action having the
effect thereof within the meaning of paragraph              15. (Separation From Service, Discharge) Sep-
l-l9b(l), AR 635-200. In concept, the effect of             aration For Fraudulent Entry Based Upon
the action of the appellate courts is that there           Recruiter Connivance Not Appropriate Ab-
was no trial on the general issue of guilt or              sent a Disqualification For Enlistment And
innocence. Subsequent withdrawal or dismissal              Fraudulent Intent. DAJA-AL 1978/2292, 13
of the charges in this circumstance is not a               Apr. 1978. The ABCMR requested an OTJAG
factual determination absolving the accused of             ,opinion on the following case. During a back-
the alleged misconduct. The effect of the au-              ground investigation in 1976, it was determined
thorization of a rehearing is t o treat the earlier        the E M had not disclosed a felony arrest that
court proceeding as a nullity, and thereby to              occurred after his enlistment in the Delayed
treat the charges as in the same posture as                Entry Program on 18 July 1974, but prior to his
before the first trial. Accordingly, there would           enlistment in the RA and entry on active duty
be no legal objection under paragraph lr19b(l),            on 9 December 1974. The arrest involved a
AR 635-200, to processing these cases under                theft of $50 from the E M S civilian employer.
applicable provisions of Chapters 13 or 14, AR             On 14 October 1974, he was accepted into the          F
635-200.                                                   Pennsylvania Accelerated Rehabilitative Dis-
                                                                                       DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     33
position Program for this incident. He was                not have been discharged under the circum-
placed on probation for 45 days, ordered to               stances of this case.
make restitution and pay a fine. The procedure
allowed him to avoid making a plea and, upon
successful completion of the probation, to have           16. (Separation From The Service, Release
the charges dismissed.                                    From Military Control) Service Member Who
                                                          Enlists And Deserts While Still Underage
  In the applicant’s case, charges were not               And Remains In Desertion Status, Should Be
dismissed until February 1975, after his entry            Separated UP Paragraph 5-11 A R 635-200
on active duty, although he was entitled to               (Lack of Jurisdiction-Void      Minority En-
have them dismissed p r i o r to his enlistment in        listment). DAJA-AL 1978/2471, 5 May 1978.
the RA.                                                   Private B enlisted in the Army on 21 April
  The E M stated that he mentioned this matter            1976 using the name and birth certificate of a
to the recruiter, but was advised “not to worry           friend, Mr. E. His DOB was shown as Feb-
about it.” When these facts were brought to the           ruary 1956; his actual DOB was February 1960.
attention of the GCMCA in September 1976, he              He departed AWOL on 30 April 1976, just nine
ordered the EM’S release from active duty on              days after his fraudulent enlistment. He was
the grounds of fraudulent enlistment with re-             apprehended by civil authorities on 16 August
cruiter connivance. An application to the                 1976, but departed AWOL again on 23 August
ABCMR followed.                                           1976. He was DFR of his unit on 18 January
                                                          1977. His present whereabouts are unknown.
  OTJAG stated the opinion that, considering
the context of the Pennsylvania proceedings,                OTJAG expressed the opinion that Private
the fact that the applicant raised the matter of          B, alias Mr. E, was not subject to military
the proceedings with the recruiter, the fact              jurisdiction because his minority enlistment
that he was qualified for enlistment (because he          was void. No constructive enlistment arose. He
had completed his probation and was entitled to           was only 16 during his briefinvoluntary contact
dismissal of the charges) or could have easily            with the military following apprehension and
become qualified (by having the charge dropped            had no contact lwith the military while either
in accordance with the Pennsylvania proce-                17 or 18. Even though he fradulently procured
dures), there was no fraudulent intent attribut-          his enlistment, by concealment of minority and
able to him. Accordingly, the mandatory vio-              of true name, it i s not treated as fraudulent
dance of enlistment as required by AR 635-200,            entry (paras. 14-4 and 14-4g, AR 635-200).
para. 14-4a, was not applicable to his case and           However, chapter 7, AR 635-200 (minority), is
the EM should not have been released from                 not applicable by its terms because B is neither
service.                                                  under military control nor still under age 18.
  TJAG recognized the possibility of discharge            Accordingly, his case should be processed UP
for concealment of an arrest record UP AR                 para. 5-11, AR 635-200 (lack of jurisdiction),
635-200, para. 5-38, but considered he would              and he may be separated in absentia.


                                      JUDICIARY NOTES
                                    From: U.S. Army Judiciary

ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES
~~          ~~
                                                          ing authority does not include confinement, or
                                                          ifthe sentence to confinement is suspended or
staff Judge Advocates are reminded of the fol-
.   .                                                     deferred, forfeitures may not be applied until
lowing:                                                   the sentence is ordered into execution, unless
     a. If a sentence as approved by the conven-          the suspension to confinement is vacated, or
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                                i
                                                                                                                               -


                                                             34
the deferment is rescinded. A statement to the                       NON-JUDICIAL PUNISHMENT
effect that confinement andlor the application                       QUARTERLY COURT-MARTIAL
of forfeitures is deferred until the sentence i s
ordered into execution, unless such deferment
                                                                      RATES PER 1000 AVERAGE
is sooner rescinded, should be included in the                              STRENGTH
initial action of the convening authority. See                            APRIL-JUNE 1978
para 88d(3), MCM, 1969 (Rev.).
  b. All requests for deferment of confinement
should be in writing and attached as part o f the                 ARMY-WIDE                                    52.47
record.                                                           CONUS Army commands                          64.05
                                                                  OVERSEAS Army commands                       49.87
   QUARTERLY COURT-MARTIAL                                         USAREUR and Seventh
    RATES PER 1000 AVERAGE                                         Army commands                               48.69
                                                                   Eighth US Army                              67.02
          STRENGTH                                                 US Anny Japan                               10.35
       APRIL -JUNE 1978                                            Units in Hawaii                             64.66
                                                                   Units in Thailand                             -
                     GENERAL    SPECIAL  SUMMARY                   u ia in Alaska
                                                                     n t                                       38.47
                       CM         CM       CM                     Units in Panama/Canal Zone                   43.06
                               BCD NON-BCD                        NOTE: Above figures represent geographical areas under the
ARMY-WIDE             .36      .24     1.31       .60             jurisdiction of the commands and are based on average
CONUS Army                                                        number of personnel on duty within those areas.
 commands             .23      .19     1.26       .73
OVERSEAS Army
 commands             .57      .31     1.39       .37
USAREUR and
 Seventh A m y
 commands             .a       .I8     1.44       .19
 Eighth US Army       .25     1.10     1.43       .33
 US Anny Japan        .35       -        -        -
 Units in Hawaii      .42      .53     1.64      1.48
 Units in Thailand    -         -        -        -
  n t
 u ia in Alaska       .20      .30     1.42       .20
 Units in Panama
   /Canal Zone       1.39       -        -       3.47
NOTE: Above figures represent geographical areas under the
jurisdiction the commands and are brrsed on average number
of personnel on duty within those areas.

                                                                                                                                   I
                                                                                                             DA Pam 27-50-69
r'                                                                   35
                                 DEPARTMENT OF ARMY
                        CONVICTIONS AND NONJUDICIAL PUNISHMENTS
                                                              Reporting Period
                                                      1JAN       To 30JUN1978




                                     *q?
                                          NUMBER AND RATEllOOO OF PERSONS CONVICTED AND PERSONS
                                                    PUNISHED UNDER ARTICLE 15 1JCMJ
                                                                                           OVE ZSEAS
                                        WORLDWIDE                         CONUS           (EXC :PTVN)            VIETNAM



                                                                                                             -+-
                                                                                                 -
                                      Number        Ratel1000                           Number       Ratdl000 Number   Ratel1000
     General Courts
      Martial                                                                             261          .90
     special courts
       Martial                                                                            783         2.71
     Summary Courts
       Martial                                                                            172          .59
     Total Courts-
       Martial                         3.342           4.35         2.126       4.44     1.216        4.20
     Nonjudiaal Punishments
      (Art. UCMJ)                         - 1
                                      80,146          104.3                             28,657        99.1


                                                I
            16.
     U.S. Federal &
       State Courts (Felony*
                                         324            .42     ~    322    1     .67       2
                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                 -    .007


                                               NUMBER OF DISCHARGES ADJUDGED & ACTUALLY EXECUTED
                                                             DURING REPORTING PERIOD
                                                                                                                 DISCHARGES
                                                               DISCHARGES ADJUDGED                                EXECUTED




       * A conviction is reportable when the offense is a felony under the law of the jurisdiction in which the accused was
     convicted.
       * Dishonorable Discharge; Bad Conduct Discharge
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                              F

                                                    36
                               LEGAL ASSISTANCE ITEMS
    Major F. John Wagner, Jr., Developments, Doctrine and Literature Department,
      and Major Joseph C . Fowler, Jr. and Major Steven F . Lancaster, Administrative
                             and Civil Law Division, TJAGSA.

1. ITEMS OF INTEREST.                                    after 1 January 1978. As a result of this
                                                         amendment service members domiciled in
Taxationatate And Local Income l'a.dhde                  Rhode Island will not be able to claim a tax
Island.                                                  exempt status as a nonresident domiciliary and
                                                         will therefore be subject to Rhode Island in-
   In what appears to be a direct response to                  tax. [Ref: ch. 43, DA PAM27-12.]
the Supreme Court of Rhode Island's decision
in Flather v . Tax Administrator (No. 75-                2. ARTICLES OF INTEREST.
136-M.P.) (see Legal Assistance Item, THE                 Taxation-Federal Estate Tax And Gift Tax.
ARMYLAWYER,        Dec. 1974 at 38), the Rhode           Madden, I s the Living Gift Really Dead? 56
Island General Assembly has amended R.I.
                                                            TAXES435 (August 1978). Sacks, An Es-
Gen. Laws § 44-30-5. This amendment includes                tate Planning ToolSeverance and Re-
any person who is domiciled in the state in the
                                                            Creation of Joint Tenancies, 24 PRAC.
definition of resident individual for purposes of
                                                            LAW.71 (July 1978).
the Rhode Island state income tax. This defini-
tion applies to taxable years beginning on or            [Ref: Ch. 42, DA PAM27-12.1.



                                        CLAIMS ITEM
                            FROM: U . S .Army Claims Service, OTJAG

Changes to the Centralized Recovery Pro-                 can be done more efficiently in the field where
gram: On 1 August 1978, all claims approving             the personnel are already familiar with the file.
and settlement authorities assumed responsi-             The Claims Service has an active workload and
bility for baggage and household goods recov-            backlog of approximately 25,000 potential re-
ery actions against third parties which could be         covery files. The backlog has increased each
settled in amounts of $100.00 or less. The field         month for the past year. It is anticipated that
is still required to process files exceeding             recoveries of $100.00 or less by the field will
$100.00 in approximately the same manner as              give this Service a reduced monthly input so
prescribed when centralized recovery com-                that the backlog can be reduced.
menced in May 1976. The basic requirements
for processing are set forth in paragraph 11-40            The Claims Sevice requests the help and as-
of AR 27-20. Although these requirements may             sistance of all claims approving and settlement
appear on the surface to be exacting, they are           authorities to make these new procedures
necessary for an effective recovery operation.           work. A sustained good faith effort must be
Most of the administrative processing which is           made to fully resolve the $100.00 or less recov-
required to provide the basis for recovery               ery actions and they should be declared an
should have already been completed to justify            impasse' only after all other reasonable efforts
the proper payment of the claim. Any addi-               have failed. In your demand letter to the car-
tional processing required should use no more            riers, continue to stress that their response
than 10-15 minutes of a clerk's time per average         must be to your address in order to avoid
claim file. These administrative requirements            misdirected mailings. The demand form letter




                                                                                                                 i
                                                                                       DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                    37
must also be modified to indicate that checks            manhours which should be devoted to normal
should be made payable to the Treasurer of the           operations. Strict compliance by local claims
United States. In addition, failure to comply            offices with published instructions is of the ut-
with requirements regarding preparation of               most importance. Help us achieve a recovery
files for recovery actions over $100.00 create           system which will return the maximum amount
exceptions to normal processing procedures in            of monies at the least overall cost to the Gov-
the Centralized Recovery Branch. These ex-               ernmen t.
ceptions consume an inordinate number of


                             RESERVE AFFAIRS SECTION
                              Reserve Affairs Department, TJAGSA

1. Court-Martial Detachment Training.                    military justice and the civilian personnel mat-
                                                                                                 ~




                                                         ters.
JAGSO Court-Martial Defense teams’ quadren-
                                                           Law Center Commander Lieutenant Colonel
nial training at TJAGSA was conducted 10-21
                                                         Robert J. Smith has also offered other military
July 1978. The training consisted of seminars,
                                                         installations the opportunity to utilize these
lectures and practical exercises in military jus-
                                                         legal services to augment or expand present
tice to include an update of recent develop-
ments in the same subject area. The adminis-             capabilities in legal assistance. Legal advice
                                                         usually includes wills, powers of attorney, con-
trative support was provided by 1157th USAR
                                                         tract matters, domestic relations, consumer
School from Schenectady, New York, Colonel
John F. O’Conner, Commandant.                            affairs, and general civil matters. Colonel
                                                         Smith also wishes other reserve units to know
                                                         that the 5th JAG Detachment is prepared to
2.LEGAL SERVICES OFFERED BY 5th
                                                         offer pre-mobilization coun’seling to all reserve
MILITARY LAW CENTER
                                                         units in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Since the fall of 1977, the 5th Military Law
                                                         3. RESERVE COMPONENTS TECHNICAL
Center has greatly expanded its support of
                                                         TRAINING (ON-SITE)SCHEDULE
active military installations in Northern
California. Members of this reserve unit are
                                                           The schedule which follows sets forth the
now providing legal assistance to the following
                                                         subject, date, and city of the on-site training to
military bases in the Northern California area:
                                                         be presented in academic year 1978-79. Also
NAS - Moffat Field (Mountain View, Califor-
                                                         included is a list of the local “action officers”
nia); Treasure Island Navy Base (San Fran-               and the training site location for each unit.
cisco); Naval Supply Depot (Oakland); Beale                Reserve Component officers who do not re-
Air Force Base (Marysville, California);                 ceive notification of the on-site program
Alameda Naval Air Station; Sacramento Army
                                                         through their unit of assignment are encour-
Depot; Defense Depot Tracy; and Sharpe Army
                                                         aged to confirm the date, time and location of
Depot (Lathrop).
                                                         the scheduled training with the action officer.
   Personnel of this unit include general prac-          In order to provide maximum opportunity for
titioners, assistant district attorneys, judges,         interested JAG officers to take advantage of
and federal and state governmental lawyers.              this training coordination should be initiated
Additionally, these lawyers have experience in           with units other than JAGSO detachments and
providing legal assistance to military person-           with members of the Individual Ready Reserve
nel, and providing advice on mission related             (IRR). In addition, all active duty JAGC offi-
matters such as procurement, military affairs,           cers assigned to posts, camps and stations lo-
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                    P
                                                     38
cated near the scheduled training site are en-            advise their commander of the “on-site” train-
couraged to attend the sessions.                          ing and request equivalent training for unit
                                                          assemblies during the month of the technical
   Detachment commanders who have not al-                 training.
ready done so are requested to amend their
unit training schedule to conform to the pub-                Questions by local Reserve Component offi-
lished schedule. For those units performing               CerS  Concerning the On-Site inStrLlCtiOn should
OJT a t various posts, it may be necessary to             be directed to the appropriate action officer.
advise the       involved that your unit may not          Problems encountered by action Officers or Unit
be available for OJT during the date of the               commanders should be directed to Captain
“on-site” training.                                       Lumpkins, Reserve Affairs Department, The
                                                          Judge Advocate General’s School, Charlottes-
  Reserve Component JAG Corps officers as-                ville, Virginia 22901. Captain Lumpkins’ tele-
signed to troop program units other than Judge            phone numbers are commercial (804) 293-6121
Advocate General Service Organizations should             and Autovon 274-7110, extension 293-6121.



SCHEDULE FOR RESERVE COMPONENT TECHNICAL TRAINING (ON-
                SITE) PROGRAM, MY 1978-79
              City      Date & Time        Subject                   Action Officsr        Tmening Site Location
                                                                         Phons
 1 Boston              28 Oet 78      Criminal Law               WO Paul Kennedy      Boston USAR Center.
                       0800-1700      Admin & Civil Law          617-796-2255
                                      International Law
2   Omaha              4 Nov 78       Criminal Law               COL John P.          USAR Center
                       0800-1700      Admin & Civil Law           Churchman
                                                                 712-322-4965
    Kansas City         5 Nov 78      Criminal Law               LTC Robert S. Clark Liberty Memorial
    (to include Topeka) 0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law          816-231-4474
                                      International Law
                                        (Tape)
3   Los Angeles        18 Nov 78      Criminal Law               LTC Cliff Larson     JAG Office
                       0800-1700      Admin & Civil Law          213-688-4664         Building #32
                                      International Law                               Fort MacArthur
    Tucson (to include 19 Nov 78      Criminal Law               MAJ Harold Dale      Office of SJA
      Phoenix)         0800-1700      International Law          602-538-3181         Fort Huachuca
                                        (Tape)
    San Diego          19 Nov 78      Admin & Civil Law          MAJ Donald Clark     Miramar Naval Air Station
                       0800-1700      International Law          714-477-3177
4   Seattle            13 Jan 79      Criminal Law               LTC John P Cook      Harvey Hall
                       0800-1700      Admin & Civil Law          206-624-7990         Fort Lawton
                                      International Law
    San Francisco      14 Jan 79      Criminal Law               LTC Robert J. Smith 6th Army Conference Room
                       0800-1700      Admin & Civil Law          415-9613300         Building #35
                                      International Law                              Presidio, California
    Honolulu           16-17 Jan 79   Criminal Law               COL Donald C.        Bruyeres Quadrangle
                       1900-2300      Admin & Civil Law           Machado
                                      International Law          808-43a-9963
                                                                                        DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                        39
          City          Date & Time           Subject           Action Officer        Training Site Location
                                                                    PbOnC

6    Washington, DC     4 Feb 79         Criminal Law        MAJ George R.        Southern Maryland
                        0800-1700        Admin & Civil Law     Borsari            Memorial USAR Center
                                         International Law   202-296-8900
                                         Procurement

     San Juan           5 , 6 F e b 79   Criminal Law        LTC Luis Feliciano   Conference Room
       Puerto Rico      1900-2300        Admin & Civil Law   809-764-6135         HQ Puerto Rico
                                         International Law                        National Guard
                                         Procurement
6 Austin                10 F e b 79      Criminal Law        MAJ Charles Sebesta USAR Center
                        0800-1700        International Law   713-567-4362
     Dallas/Ft Worth    11 Feb 79        Criminal Law        LTC Virgil A. Lowne Muchert Reserve Center
                        0800- 1200                           817-387-3831-Ext 222
     Little Rock        11 Feb 79        Admin & Civil Law   MAT Don Langston      Seymour Terry Armory
                        0800- 1200         (Tape)            601-785-2326
                                         International Law
7    Atlanta            10 F e b 79      Criminal Law        CPT Robert A.         Chamblee Armory
                        0800-1700        Admin & Civil Law     Bartlett
                                                             404-688-1100
8 San Antonio           24 F e b 79      Criminal Law        MAJ John Compere      USAR Center
                        0800-1700        Admin & Civil Law   612-225-3031          2010 Harry Wunbach
                                                                                     Highway
     Houston            25 Feb 79        Criminal Law        MAJ Donald M. Bishop Annex Building
                        0800-1700        Admin & Civil Law   713-666-8000, E x t 4184
9 Miami                 24 F e b 79      Criminal Law        LTC Alden N. h c k e r 5601 San Amaro Drive
                        0800-1700        International Law   306-638-1401
     Orlando            25 Feb 79        Criminal Law        COL Theodore H.
                        0800-1200                              Van Deventer
                                                             305-656-1753          Orlando Naval T r a i n i n g
                                                                                    Center
     Tampal             25 Feb 79        International Law   M A J James L.        USAR Center
       St. Petersburg   0800-1200                              Livingston          St. Petersburg, Florida
                                                             813-385-6156
10   Denver (to include 3 Mar 79         Criminal Law        LTC Bernard Thorn     1-332 Fitzsimons Army
      Colorado springs) 0800-1700        Admin & Civil Law   303-573-7600            Medical Center
                                         Procurement
     Salt Lake City     4 Mar 79         Criminal Law        COL G. Gail           Bldg #lo7
                        0800-1700        Admin & Civil Law     Weggeland           Fort Douglas
                                                             801-624-6796
     Albuquerque        3 Mar 79         International Law   LTC John McNett       Bldg P327
                        0800-1200                            505-264-7265          Kirkland AFB
     Tulsa              4 Mar 79         international Law   LTC Arthur W.         USAR Center
                        0800-1700        Procurement           Breeland
                                                             918-582-6201
11 Louisville (to in- 10 Mar 79          Criminal Law        LTC Martin F.         Hangar #7
    clude Lexington) 0800-1700           Admin & Civil Law     Sullivan            Bowman Field
                                         Procurement         502-6874 145
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                 P   -

                                                   40
       City           Date & Time        Subject             Action Offices       Training Site Location
                                                                 Phone

     Memphis          11 Mar 79     Criminal Law          M A J Robert G.      Marine Hospital
                      0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law       Drewry
                                    Procurement           901-526-0542


12   Harrisburg       10 Mar 79     Criminal Law          LTC HarveF,S.        Bldg #442
                      0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law       Leedom             New Cumberland Army
                                                          717-782-6310
                                                                                 Depot
13 New York           17 Mar 79     Criminal Law          LTC Michael Bradie   Petterson USAR Center
                      0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law     516-295-3344
                                    International Law
     Philadelphia     18 Mar 79     Criminal Law          CPT Donald Moser     USAR Center
                      0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law     216-925-5800         Willow Grove,
                                    International Law                           Pennsylvania
14   Madison          7 Apr 79      Criminal Law          LTC Dean Massey      Madison AFR Armory
                      0800-1200                           608-262-3568
     Milwaukee        8 Apr 79      Criminal Law          LTC James Moll       636 West Silver Spring
                      0800-1200                           414-762-7000           Drive
16   Indianapolis     7 Apr 79      Admin & Civil Law     COL Theodore Wilson Boros Hall
                      0800-1700     International Law     317-923-4673
     St. Louis        8 Apr 79      Admin & Civil Law     LTC Claude McElwee TBA
                      0800-1700     International Law     314-421-5442                                     ,
                                                                                                           ”-
16   Richmond         21 Apr 79     Admin & Civil Law     MA7 Robert H.        Michelli USAR Center
                      0800-1700       (Tape)               Cooley
                                    Procurement           804-732-4667
17   Inkster          21 Apr 79     Procurement           LTC Cay A.           USAR Center
                      0800-1200                           Newhouse             West 11 Mile Road
                                                          313-264-1100,        Southfield, Michigan
                                                            E x t 2465
     Minneapolis      21 Apr 79     Criminal Law          MAT Robert M.        Bldg #601
                      0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law      Frazee              Ft. Snelling
                                                          612-388-0661

     Chicago          22 Apr 79     Criminal Law          CPT John C. Jahrling Moskala USAR Center
                      0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law     312-829-4334
                                    Procurement
18 Columbia (to       28 Apr 79     Criminal Law (Tape)   COL Hugh Rogers      Forest Drive Armory
       include        0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law     803-359-2599
       Spartanburg)
     Birmingham       29 Apr 79     Criminal Law (Tape)   LTC Edwin Strickland 142 West Valley Avenue
                      0800-1700     Admin & Civil Law     205-326-6688
19 Pittsburgh         6 May 79      Criminal Law (Tape)   MAJ Bruce Bowden     Gen Malcom Hay Armory
                      0800-1 700    Admin & Civil Law     412-562-8844
20   Columbus         5 May 79      Criminal Law          CPT Richard Sheward Conference Room
                      0800- 1700    Admin & Civil Law     614-486-6663        HQ 83rd ARCOM, Bldg 306
                                                                              Defense Construction
                                                                                Supply Center
                                                                                                  DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                          41
           City           Date & Time           Subject                 A c t i o n O/licer      Training S i t e Locaiion
                                                                             Phone

        Cleveland         6 May 79         Criminal Law             MAT David E . Burke MOTE USAR Center
                          0800- 1700       Admin & Civil Law        216-623-1350, Ext 2006
     21 Jackson           19 May 79        Criminal Law (Tape)      LTC Edward Cates          USAR Center
                          0800-1700        Admin & Civil Law        601-948-2333
        New Orleans (to   20 May 79        Criminal Law (Tape)      CPT Stanley Millan    USAR Center
         include Baton    0800-1700        Admin & Civil Law        504-865-1121, Ext 252
         Rouge)                            International Law
                                             (Tape)


                                Current FLITE Searchable Data Base
          The information in this Article i s digested f r o m the FLITE Newsletter, Vol. X I , N o . 2,
                                               Apr.-Jun. 1978.
   The following is a list of data bases searcha-              located in the Department of Justice, Washing-
 ble in the FLITE system as of 15 June 1978.                   ton, D.C. Data bases on which FLITE has
 Much of this data is searchable by FLITE's                    on-line search capability are indicated by as-
 attorney-advisors through remote terminals                    terisks.
 with direct access to the JURIS on-line system
     *Constitution of the United States                        Thru Amendment XXVI (1787 to present)
p,   *United States Code                                                                          1
                                                               Titles 1-50 APP, 1970 Thru Supp 1 1 and Pub
                                                               Laws to Mar 1978
     *United States Reports                                    Vols 45-422 (Oct 1846Jan 1975)
     *Supreme Court Reporter                                   Vols 96-98 (Jan 1975-May 1978)
     *Federal Reporter 2d Series                               Vols 116-572 (Jun 1941-May 1978)
     *Federal Supplement                                       Vols 30-446 (Jul1939-May 1978)
     *Federal Digest                                           1961-present
     *United States Court of Claims                            Vols 134-206 (Jan 1956-Apr 1975)
      Armed Services Procurement Regulation                    1975 Ed (Oct 1975)
      Board of Contract Appeals Decisions                      Vols 56-2 thru 76-2 (Jul1956-Dec 1976)
        *Published                                             Vols 1-54 (Jun 1921June 1975)
          Unpublished                                            (Jun 1955-Jull976)
     *Court-Martial Reports                                    Vols 1-54 thru page 1241 (Dec. 1951-Mar 1977)
     *Military Justice Reporter                                Vol 3 M.J. Adv. Op. pp 1-347 (Mar 1977-Nov
                                                                 1977)
      Air Force Regulations                                    AFR 1-2 thru AFR 900-47 (Dec 1975)
     *Code of Federal Regulations                              1974 Ed, Titles 10, 18,28 and 37
      Manual for Courts-Martial                                1968 Rev. Ed
      Treaties and International Agreements
         Published                                             DoD Selected (June 1949-Dec 1974)
         Unpublished                                           DoD Selected (June 1947-1975)
DA P a m 27-50-69                                                                                       r
                                                  42
  FLITE is chartered by the Department of              the Supreme Court; the Department of Defense
Defense to provide computer based legal re-            and its military components; and the United
search and special products to all agencies of         States Coast Guard. A fee of $50 for each data
the federal government. The DoD General                base searched is charged to all other agencies
Counsel provides policy guidance, and The              and activities of the federal government.
Judge Advocate General of the Air Force                   FLITE CAN be contacted at FLITE (HQ
serves as executive agent.                             USAF/JAESL), Denver, CO 80279, commercial
  Search services are provided without charge          telephone (303) 320-7531, autovon 926-7531, or
to the Executive Offices of the President; the         FTS326-7531.
Congress (including the Library of Congress),


                                         CLE NEWS
1. Civilian Sponsored CLE Courses.                       28-29: Institute for Paralegal Training,
                                                       Seminar on Evidence and Trial Preparation,
                SEPTEMBER
                                                       Washington, DC. Contact: Kathryn Mann,
  13-15: Institute for Paralegal Training,             Continuing Professional Education, The Insti-
Workshop for Paralegal Managers, Philadel-             tute for Paralegal Training, Suite 819, 1616
phia, PA. Contact: Kathryn Mann, Continuing            Walnut St., Philadelphia, PA 19103. Phone:
Professional Education, The Institute for              (215) 732-6999. Cost: $225.
Paralegal Training, Suite 819, 1616 Walnut St.,
Philadelphia, PA 19103. Phone: (215) 731-6999.                                                          f-
cost: $395.                                                             OCTOBER
  14-15: PLI, Labor-Management Relations:                5-6: PLI, Practical Will Drafting, Americana
Personnel Practices and Collective Bargaining          Hotel, New York, NY. Contact: Practicing
Agreements, Barbizan Plaza Hotel, New York,            Law Institute, 810 Seventh Avenue, New
NY. Contact: Practicing Law Institute, 810             York, NY 10019. Phone: (212) 765-5700. Cost:
Seventh Ave., New York, NY 10019. Phone:               $175.
(212) 765-5700. Cost: $185.                              6-7: PLI, 16th Annual Defending Criminal
  15-16: PLI, 16th Annual Defending Criminal           Cases: The Rapidly Changing Practice of
Cases: The Rapidly Changing Practice of                Criminal Law. The Beverly Hilton Hotel, Los
Criminal Law, Americana Hotel, New York,               Angeles, CA. Contact: Practicing Law Insti-
NY. Contact: Practicing Law Institute, 810             tute, 819 Seventh Ave., New York, NY 10019.
Seventh Ave., New York NY 10019. Phone:                Phone: (212) 765-5700. Cost: $160.
(212) 765-5700. Cost: $160.                              13-15: National College of Criminal Defense         I

  18-19: Institute for Paralegal Training,             Lawyers and Public Defenders, Jury Selection
Preparation, Houston, TX. Contact: Kathryn             Techniques, St. Louis, MO, Contact: Registrar,        ,
Mann, Continuing Professional Education, The           NCCDLPD, College of Law, University of            ’
Institute for Paralegal Training, Suite 819,           Houston, 4800 Calhoun, Houston, TX 70004.
1616 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103.            Phone: (713) 749-2283.
Phone: (215) 732-6999. Cost: $225.                       16-18: University of Baltimore, School of
  25-29: Southern Federal Tax Institute, Inc.,         Business and Federal Publications, Inc., Small
135th Annual Southern Federal Tax Institute,           Purchasing Course, Airport Park Hotel, Los
Hyatt Regency, Atlanta, GA. Contact: South-            Angeles, CA. Contact: Miss J. K. Van Wycks,
ern Federal Tax Institute, Inc., 207 Cain              Seminar Division, Federal Publications, Inc.,
Tower, 229 Peachtree Street, NE, Atlanta, GA           1725 K St., N.W., Washington, DC 20006.
30303. Cost: $225.                                     Phone: (202) 337-7000.                           P
                                                                                                   DA Pam 27-50-69
    f-                                                           43
              16-20: University of Santa Clara School of              Personnel Practices and Collective Bargaining
           Law and Federal Publications, Inc., The Skills             Agreements, Fairmont Hotel, San Francisco,
           of Contract Administration, Stouffer's Denver              CA. Contact: Practicing Law Institute, 810
           Inn, Denver, CO. Contact: Miss J. K. Van                   Seventh Ave., New York NY 10019. Phone:
           Wycks, Seminar Division, Federal Publica-                  (212) 765-5700. Cost: $185.
           tions, Inc., 1725 K St., N.W., Washington, DC                6-8: University of Baltimore School of Busi-
           20006. Phone: (202) 337-7000. Cost: $575.                  ness and Federal Publications, Inc., Small Pur-
              18-20: University of Baltimore School of Law            chasing Course, Sheraton National; Arlington,
           and Federal Publications, h e . , Practical                VA. Contact: Miss J. K. Van Wycks, Seminar
           Negotiation of Government Contracts, Shera-                Division, Federal Publications, Inc., 1725 K
           ton National, Arlington, VA. Contact: Miss J.              St., NW, Washington, DC 20006. Phone: (202)
           K. Van Wycks, Seminar Division, Federal                    337-7000.
           Publications, Inc., 1725 K Street, NW, Wash-                  9-10: University of Baltimore School of
           ington, DC 20006. Phone: (202) 337-7000. Cost:             Business and Federal Publications, Inc., Pro-
            $475.                                                     curement for Secretaries, Sheraton National,
               19-20. University of Baltimore School of               Arlington, VA. Contact: Miss J. K. Van
            Business and Federal Publications, Inc., Pro-             Wycks, Seminar Division, Federal Publica-
            curement for Secretaries, Airport Park Hotel,             tions, Inc., 1725 K St., NW, Washington, DC
            Los Angeles, CA. Contact: Miss J. K. Van                  20006. Phone: (202) 337-7000.
            Wycks, Seminar Division, Federal Publica-                    12-17: National Judicial College, Sentencing
            tions, Inc., 1725 K St., N.W., Washington, DC             Misdemeanants-Specialty,         University of
            20006. Phone: (202) 337-7000.                             Nevada, Reno, NV. Contact: National Judicial
    F,,
               19-22: National Legal Aid and Defender As-             College, University of Nevada, Reno, NV
          ' sociation and National Clients Council, 56th              89557. Phone: (702) 784-6747.
1
            Annual Conference, Washington Hilton Hotel,                  17-19: National College of Criminal Defense
            Washington, DC. Contact: National Legal Aid               Lawyers and Public Defenders, Advanced
            and Defender Association, 2100 M St., N.W.,               Cross-Examination Techniques in Drug Cases,
            Suite 601, Washington, DC 20037.                          New Y o r k , NY. Contact: R e g i s t r a r ,
                              NOVEMBER                                NCCDLPD, College of Law, University of
                                                                      Houston, 4800 Calhoun, Houston, TX 77004.
              2-3: PLI, Practical Will Drafting, Hyatt Re-            Phone: (713) 749-2283.
            gency Hotel, Phoenix, AZ. Contact: Practicing
                                                                         27-29: University of Baltimore School of Law
            Law Institute, 810 Seventh Avenue, New
            York, NY 10019. Phone: (212) 765-5700. Cost:              and Federal Publications, Inc., Practical
            $175.
                                                                      Negotiations of Government Contracts, Airport
                                                                      Park Hotel, Los Angeles, CA. Contact: Miss J.
              4-6: National College of Criminal Defense               K. Van Wycks, Seminar Division, Federal
            Lawyers and Public Defenders, Advanced                    Publications, Inc., 1725 K St., NW, Washing-
            Cross-Examination Techniques in Drug Cases,               ton, DC 20006. Phone: (202) 337-7000. Cost:
    .
    '       L a s V e g a s , NV. Contact: R e g i s t r a r ,        $475.
            NCCDLPD, College of Law, University of
            Houston, 4800 Calhoun, Houston, TX 77004.                 2. TJAGsA CLE courses.
i           Phone: (713) 749-2283.
I             5-10: National Judicial College, Alcohol and              September 18-29: 77th Procurement Attor-
                                                                      ney's Course (SF-F10).
            Drugs-Specialty,     University of Nevada,
            Reno, NV. Contact: National Judicial College,               October 2-6: 9th Law of War Workshop
            University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557. Phone:              (5F-F42).
            (703) 784-6747.                                            October 10-13: Judge Advocate General's
    I",       6-7: PLI, Labor-Management Relations:                   Conference and CLE Seminars.
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                         P

                                                44
  October 16-December 15: 88th Judge Advo-              March 26-28: 3d Government Information
cate Officer Basic (5-27-C20).                       Practices (5F-F28).
  October 16-20: 6th Defense Trial Advocacy             April 2-6: 46th Senior Officer Legal Orienta-
(5F-F34).                                            tion (5F-Fl).
  October 23-November 3: 78th Procurement               April 9-12: 9th Fiscal Law (5F-F12).
Attorney’s Course (5F-F10).                             April 9-12: 2d Litigation (5F-F29).
                                                                           -
  November 6-8: 2d Criminal Law New De-                 April 17-19: 3d Claims (5F-F-26).
velopments (5F-F35).
                                                        April 23-27: 9th Staff Judge Advocate Orien-
  November 13-16: 8th Fiscal Law (5F-F12).           tation (5F-F52).
  November 27-December 1: 43d Senior Offi-              April 23-May 4: 80th Procurement Attor-
cer Legal Orientation (5F-Fl).                       neys’ Course (5F-FlO).
  December 4-5: 2d Procurement Law Work-                May 7-10: 6th Legal Assistance (5F-F23).
shop (5F-F15).
                                                        May 14-16: 3d Negotiations (5F-Fl4).
  December 7-9: JAG Reserve Conference and
Workshop.                                               May 2l-June 8: 18th Military Judge (5F-
                                                     F33).
  December 11-14: 6th Military Administrative
Law DeveloDments (5F-F25).                              May 30-June 1: Legal Aspects of Terrorism. *
  January 8-12: 9th Procurement Attorneys’              June 11-15: 47th Senior Officer Legal Orien-
Advanced (5F-Fll).                                   tation (5F-Fl).
  January 8-12: 10th Law of War Workshop                June 18-29: JAGS0 (CM Trial).
(5F-F42).                                               June 21-23: Military Law Institute Seminar.     -
                                                                                                        /



  January 15-17: 5th Allowability of Contract           July 9-13 (Proc) and July 16-20 (Int. Law):
Costs (5F-F13).                                      JAOGC/CGSC (Phase VI Int. Law, Procure-
  January 15-19: 6th Defense Trial Advocacy          men t).                                                t


(5F-F34).                                               July 9-20: 2d Military Administrative Law
  January 22-26: 44th Senior Officer Legal           (5F-F20).
Orientation (5F-Fl).                                    July 16-August 3: 19th Military Judge (5F-
  January 29-March 30: 89th Judge Advocate           F33).
Officer Basic (5-27-C20).                               July 23-August 3: 81st Procurement Attor-
  January 29-February 2: 18th Federal Labor          neys’ Course (5F-F10).
Relations (5F-F22).                                     August 6-October 5: 90th Judge Advocate
   February 5-8: 8th Environmental Law               Officer Basic (5-27-C20).
(5F-F27).                                               August 13-17: 48th Senior Officer Legal
  February 12-16: 6th Criminal Trial Advocacy        Orientation (5F-Fl).
(5F-F32).                                               August 20-May 24, 1980: 28th Judge Advo-
  February 21-March 2: Military Lawyer‘s As-         cate Officer Graduate (5-27-C22).
sistant (512-71D20/50).                                 August 27-31: 9th Law Office Management             Ii
                                                     (7A-713A).
  March 5-16: 79th Procurement Attorneys’
(5F-F10).                                              September 17-21: 12th Law of War Work-
  March 5-8: 45th Senior Officer Legal Orien-        shop (5F-F42).
tation (War College) (5F-Fl).                          September 28-28: 49th Senior Officer Legal
  March 19-23: 11th Law of War Workshop              Orientation (5F-Fl).
                                                                                                        T
(5F-F42).                                              *Tentative.
                                                                                         Ii




                                                                                    DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                    45
3. TJAGSA Course Prerequisites and Sub-                  quotas and waivers of prerequisites should be
stantive Content.                                        directed to Commandant, The Judge Advocate,
                                                         General’s School, U.S. Army, Charlottesville,
GENERAL INFORMATION                                      Virginia 22901, ATTENTION: Academic De-
                                                         partment.
The Judge Advocate General’s School is located
on the north grounds of the University of Vir-                      TABLE OF CONTENTS
ginia at Charlottesville. The mission of the
School is to provide resident and nonresident            COURSE       TITLE
instruction in military law. The School’s faculty        NUMBER
is composed entirely of military attorneys.
                                                         5-27420      Judge Advocate Officer Basic
                                                         5-27-C22     Judge Advocate Officer Graduate
THE ACADEMIC DEPARTMENT                                  5F-F1        Senior Officers’ Legal Orienta-
                                                                        tion
The Academic Department develops and con-                5F-F10       Contract Attorneys’*
ducts resident and nonresident instruction. The          5F-Fll       Contract Attorneys’ Advanced
organization of the Department includes Crimi-           5F-F12       Fiscal Law
nal Law, Administrative and Civil Law, Inter-            5F-F13       Allowability of Contract Costs
nal Law and Contract Law Divisions. Within               5F-F14       Negotiations
the Department, the Nonresident Instruction              5F-F15       Contract Attorneys’ Workshop
Branch administers t h e School’s corre-                 5F-F20       Military Administrative Law
spondence course program and other nonresi-              5F-F21       Civil Law
dent instruction.                                        5F-F22       Federal Labor Relations
                                                         5F-F23       Legal Assistance
                                                         5F-F25       Military Administrative Law De-
COURSES OFFERED                                                         velopments.
                                                         5F-F26       Claims
The Judge Advocate General’s School offers a             5F-F27       Environmental Law
total of 31 different resident courses. The offi-        5F-F28       Government Information Prac-
cial source of information concerning courses of                        tices
instruction at all Army service schools, includ-         5F-F29       Litigation
ing the Judge Advocate General’s School, is the          5F-F30       Military Justice I
U.S. Army Formal Schools Catalog (DA Pam                 5F-F31       Military Justice I1
351-4). Attendance by foreign military person-           5F-F32       Criminal Trial,Advocacy
nel is governed by applicable Army regula-               5F-F33       Military Judge
tions. Quotas for most courses offered at The            5F-F34       Defense Trial Advocacy
Judge Advocate General’s School may be ob-               5F-F35       Criminal Law New Develop-
tained through usual unit training channels.                            ments
Exceptions to this policy are the Judge Advo-            5F-F40       International Law I
cate Officer Basic Course, Judge Advocate Of-            5F-F4 1      International Law I1
ficer Graduate Course, and Staff Judge Advo-             6F-F42       Law of War Workshop
cate Orientation Course, quotas for which are            5F-F43       Legal Aspects of Terrorism
controlled by the Personnel, Plans and Training          5F-F52       Staff Judge Advocate Orientation
Office in the Office of The Judge Advocate               7A-713A       Law Office Management
General; the Military Judge Course, quotas for           612-71D      Military Lawyer’s Assistant
which are controlled by the Army Judiciary in            20/50
Washington, D.C.: and the Senior Officer Legal
Orientation Course, quotas for which are con-            *Called Procurement Attorney’s Course until 1
trolled by MILPERCEN. Inquiries concerning               October 1978.
DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     46
    JUDGE ADVOCATE OFFICER                                Service Obligation: Two years.
     BASIC COURSE (5-27-C20)                              Substantive Content: The Judge Advocate Of-
                                                          ficer Graduate Course prepares career military
Length: 9 weeks.                                          lawyers for future service in staff judge advo-
Purpose: To provide officers newly appointed in           cate positions. To accomplish this, the course is
the Judge Advocate General’s Corps with the               ofiented toward graduate-level legal education
Basic orientation and training necessary to               comparable to the graduate programs of civil-
perform the duties of a judge advocate.                   ian law schools. The American Bar Association
Prerequisites: Commissioned officer who is a              has approved the course        meeting its stand-
lawyer and who has been appointed or antici-              ards Of graduate legal education. The course is
pates appointment in the Judge Advocate Gen-              conducted over a two-semester academic year
eral’S corps his service’s equivalent. Secu-
              or                                          totalling approximately 42 credit hours. It con-
rity clearance required: None.                            sists of the following curriculum elements:
Substantive Content: The course stresses mili-               1. Core Courses consisting of approximately
tary criminal law and procedure and other                 28 credit hours of criminal law, administrative
meas of military law which are most likely to             and Civil law, international law, and Contract
concern a judge advocate officer in his first             law subjects, military subjects and communica-
duty assignment.                                          tions.
Criminal Law: Introduction to military crimi-                2. Electives presented both by The Judge
nal law and the practical aspects of criminal             Advocate General’s School and the University
procedure and practice.                                   of Virginia School of Law totaling approxi-
                                                          mately 14 credit hours.
Administrative and Civil Law: Introduction to
personnel law (military and civilian), legal basis
of command, claims, legal assistance and Army,                SENIOR OFFICERS’ LEGAL
organization and management.                                 ORIENTATION COURSE (5F-F1)
Contract Law: Introduction to the law of U.S.
Government contracts.                                     Length: 4-H days.
International Law: Introduction to Law of                 Purpose: To acquaint senior commanders with
War and Status of Forces Agreements.                      installation and unit legal problems encoun-
                                                          tered in both the criminal and civil law fields.
    JUDGE ADVOCATE OFFICER                                Prerequisites: Active duty and reserve compo-
                                                          nent commissioned officers in the grade of colo-
   GRADUATE        (5-27-c22)                             ne1 or lieutenant colonel about to be assigned as
                                                          installation commander or deputy; service
Length: 40 weeks.                                         school commandant; principal installation com-       . I

Purpose: To provide branch training in and a              mander or deputy; service school commandant;
working knowledge of the duties and resPon-               principal staff officer (such as chief of staff,
sibilities of field grade Judge Advocate Gen-             provost marshal, inspector general, director of            !
eral’s corps officers, with emphasis on the PO-           personnel) at division, brigade or installation
sitions of deputy staff judge advocates and staff         levels; or as a brigade of commander. As space
judge advocates.                                          permits, those to be assigned as battalion com-
Prerequisites: Commissioned officer: Career                          rs
                                                          ~ ~ n d e may attend. Security Clearance re-
officer of the Armed Forces whose branch is               quired: None.
JAGC or the service’s equivalent, in fourth to            Substantive Content: Administrative and Civil
eighth year of active commissioned service.               Law: Judicial review of military activities, mili-
Army officers are selected for attendance by              tary aid to civil authorities, installation man-
The Judge Advocate General.                               agement, labor-management relations, civilian
                                                                                        DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     47
personnel law, military personnel law, nonap-             regulations governing government procure-
propriated funds, civil rights, legal assistance,         ment. To provide information on changes at the
claims and government information practices.              policy level.
Criminal Law: Survel principles relating to               Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
search and seizure, confessions, and nonjudicial          nent military attorneys or appropriate civilian
punishment. Emphasis is placed on the options             attorneys employed by the U.S. Government.
and responsibilities of convening authorities             Applicants must have successfully completed
before and after trial in military justice mat-           the Contract Attorneys’ Course (5F-F-10), or
ters, including the theories and practicabilities         equivalent training, or have at least one year’s
of sentencing. International Law: Survey of               experience as a procurement attorney. Security
Status of Forces Agreements and Law of War.               clearance required: None.
Procurement Law: Survey of t h e Anti-
Deficiency Act.                                           Substantive Content: Advanced legal concepts
                                                          arising in connection with the practical aspects
                                                          of contracting, funding, competitive negotia-
 CONTRACT ATTORNEYS’ COURSE                               tion, socio-economic policies, government as-
           (5F-F10)                                       sistance, state and local taxation, modifica-
                                                          tions, weapons system acquisition, truth in
Length: 2 weeks.                                          negotiations, terminations, labor relations
Purpose: To provide basic instruction in the              problems, contract claims, and litigation.
legal aspects of government procurement at the            Course will normally be theme oriented to focus
installation level. Completion of this course also        on a major area of procurement law. Intensive
fulfills one-half of the requirements of Phase VI         instruction will include current changes in the
of the nonresidentlresident Judge Advocate                laws, regulations and decisions of courts and
Officer Graduate Course and covers one-half of            boards. The 9th Contract Attorneys’ Course
the material presented in the USAR School                 Theme deals with contract formations with em-
Judge Advocate Officer Graduate Course ADT                phasis on socio-economic policies and other
Phase VI.                                                 legislation.
Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
nent military attorneys or appropriate civilian
                                                                   FISCAL LAW COURSE
attorneys employed by the U.S. Government,                              (5F-F12)
with six months’ or less procurement experi-
ence. Security clearance required: None.                  Length: 3% days.
Substantive Content: Basic legal concepts re-             Purpose: To provide a basic knowledge of the
garding the authority of the Government and               laws and regulations governing the obligation
its personnel to enter into contracts; contract           and expenditure o f appropriated funds and an
formation (formal advertising and negotiation),           insight into current fiscal issues within the De-
including appropriations, basic contract types,           partment of the Army. The course covers basic
service contracts, and socio-economic policies;           statutory constraints and administrative pro-
contract performance, including modifications;            cedures involved in the system of appropriation
disputes, including remedies and appeals.                 control and obligation of funds within the De-
                                                          partment of Defense. This course emphasizes
                                                          the methods contracting officers and legal and
      CONTRACT ATTORNEYS’                                 financial personnel working together can utilize
    ADVANCED COURSE-(5F-Fll)                              to avoid over-obligations.
                                                          Prerequisites: Active duty commissioned offi-
Length: 1week.                                            cer of an armed force, or appropriate civilian
Purpose: To provide con tinuing legal education           employee of the U.S. Government actively en-
and advanced expertise in the statutes and                gaged in procurement law, contracting or ad-
    DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                              ,,-\
                                                        48
    ministering funds available for obligation on                   NEGOTIATIONS COURSE
    procurement contracts. Must be an attorney,                           (5F-Fl4)
    contracting officer, comptroller, Finance & Ac-
    counting Officer, Budget Analyst or equivalent.          Length: 2-?4 days.
    Attendees should have completed TJAGSA                   Purpose: The Negotiations Course is designed
    Contract Attorneys’ Course, a financial manag-           to develop advanced understanding of the
    er’s course, a comptrollership course or equiv-          negotiated Competitive procurement method.
    alent.                                                   The course focuses on the attorney’s role in
    Substantive Content: Practical legal and ad-             negotiated competitive procurement, including:
    ministrative problems in connection with the             (1) when and how to use this method; (2) de-
    funding of government contracts. Basic aspects           velopment of source selection criteria; (3)
    of the appropriations process, administrative            source selection evaluation process; (4) com-
    control of appropriated funds, the Anti-                 petitive range; (5) oral and written discussions;
    Deficiency Act, Industrial and Stock Funds,              and (6) techniques.
    and the Minor Construction Act will be cov-              Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
    ered.                                                    nent military attorney or appropriate civilian
                                                             attorney employed by the U.S. Government,
                                                             with at least one, but not more than five years
      ALLOWABILITY OF CONTRACTS                              of procurement experience. Applicants must
            COSTS COURE                                      have successfully completed the Contract At-
               (5F-F13)                                      torneys’ Course (5F-F10) or equivalent. Secu-
    Length: 2-?4 days.                                       rity clearance required: None.
                                                             Substantive Content: The course will focus on           -
                                                                                                                     ,
    Purpose: The Allowability of Contract Costs
    Course is a basic course designed to develop an          solicitation and award by negotiation including
    understanding of the nature and means by                 selection of the procurement method, use of the
    which the Government compensates contrac-                negotiation process in the development of
    tors for their costs. The course focuses on three        source selection, discussion and techniques.
    main areas: (1) basic accounting for contract
    costs; (2) the Cost Principles of ASPR 015; and                 CONTRACT ATTORNEYS’
    (3) the Cost Accounting Standards Board and                         WORKSHOP
    the Costs Accounting Standards. The course is
    a mixture of lectures and panel discussions
                                                                          (5F-Fl5)
    aimed at covering substantive and practical is-          Length: 2 days.
    sues of contract costs. This course is not rec-          Purpose: The workshop provides an opportu-
    ommended for attorneys who are experienced
                                                             nity to examine, in the light of recent develop-
    in application of cost principles.                       ments, and discuss in depth current procure-
    Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-             ment problems encountered in installation SJA
    nent military attorney or appropriate civilian           offices. Attorneys will be asked to submit                  I




    attorney employed by the U.S. Government,                problems in advance of attendance. These will
    with at least one year of procurement experi-            be collected, researched and arranged for
    ence. Applicants must have successfully com-             seminar discussion under the direction of the
    pleted the Contract Attorneys’ Course (5F-               Contract Law faculty.
    F10)or equivalent.                                       Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
    Substantive Content: This introductory course            nent military attorneys or appropriate civilian
    will focus on three main areas: functional cost
    accounting terms and application, the Cost
    Principles, and Cost Accounting Standards.
                                                             attorneys employed by the U.S. Government
                                                             with not less than 12 months’ procurement ex-
                                                             perience who are currently engaged in the
                                                                                                                 1
                                                                                                                     -
1
                                                                                         DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                      49
practice of procurement law at installation                          CIVIL LAW COURSE
level. Security clearance required: None.                                     (5F-FZl)
Substantive Content: Discussion of current                 Length: 2 weeks.
developments in procurement law and their ap-              Purpose: To provide a working knowledge of
plication to the problems currently experienced            legal assistance and claims. (Students may at-
in installation level procurement.                         tend either the week of claims instruction or
                                                           the week of legal assistance instruction, or
                                                           both.) This course is specifically designed to
MILITARY ADMINISTRATIVE LAW                                fulfill one-half of the requirements of Phase IV
          COURSE                                           of the nonresidentlresident Judge Advocate
           (5F-F20)                                        Officer Graduate Course. It also covers one-
                                                           half of’the material presented in the USAR
Length: 2 weeks.                                           School Judge Advocate Officer Graduate
                                                           Course ADT Phase IV.
Purpose: To provide a working knowledge of
selected subjects in the area of administrative            Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
law. (Students may attend either the week of               nent military attorney, 02-04, or appropriate
personnel law instruction or the week of legal             civilian attorney employed by the U.S. Gov-
basis of command instruction, or both.) This               ernment. Although appropriate for active duty
course is specifically designed to fulfill one-half        personnel, enrollment is not recommended un-
of the reserve requirements of Phase IV of the             less the individual is working toward comple-
nonresidentlresident Judge Advocate Officer                tion of the Graduate Course by correspondence.
Graduate Course. It also covers one-half of the            Security clearance required: None.
material presented in the USAR School Judge                Substantive Content: Legal Assistance: Stat-
Advocate Officer Graduate Course ADT Phase                 utes, regulations, and court decisions which
IV.                                                        affect members of a military community, in-
                                                           cluding personal finances, consumer protection,
Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-               family law, taxation, survivor benefits, civil
nent military attorney, 02-04, or appropriate              rights, and state small claims procedures.
civilian attorney employed by the U.S. Gov-                Claims: Statutes, regulations and court deci-
ernment. Although appropriate for active duty              sions relating to the Military Personnel and
personnel, enrollment is not recommended un-               Civilian Employees Claims Act, Military
less the individual is working toward comple-              Claims Act, Army National Guard Claims Act,
tion of the Graduate Course by correspondence.             Federal Tort Claims Act and claims in favor of
Security clearance required: None.                         the Government.
Substantive Content: Personnel Law: Basic
concepts of personnel law and judicial review of              FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
military activities: Statutes, regulations and                        COURSE
court decisions relating to military personnel                         (5F-F22)
law, boards of officers, civilian personnel law,
labor-management relations and federal review              Length: 4 4 days.
of military activities. Legal Basis of Command:            Purpose: To provide a basic knowledge of per-
Statutes, regulations and court decisions re-              sonnel law pertaining to civilian employees, and
lating to the control and management of mili-              labor-management relations.
tary installations and nonappropriated funds,
environmental law, military assistance to civil            Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
authorities, and criminal and civil liabilities of         nent military attorney or appropriate civilian
military personnel.                                        attorney employed by the U.S. Government.
    DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                                   50
    Reserve officers must have completed the                            Substantive Content: New developments in
    Judge Advocate Officer Graduate Course. AI-                         the areas of legal assistance rendered military
    though appropriate for reservists, enrollment                       personnel including consumer protection, fam-
    is not recommended unless the individual is                         ily law, state and federal taxation, civil rights,
    working in the area covered by the course.                          survivor benefits, bankruptcy, and small
    Persons who have completed this course within                       claims. The instruction is presented with the
    the past two-year period immediately preced-                        assumption that students already have a fun-
    ing the date of this course are not eligible to                     damental knowledge o f legal assistance.
    attend. Security clearance required: None.
    S u b s t a n t i v e C o n t e n t : L a w of F e d e r a l
    Employment: Hiring, promotion and discharge                          MILITARY ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
    of employees under the FPM and CPR; role of                             DEVELOPMENTS COURSE
    the Civil Service Commission; procedures for                                    (5F-F25)
    grievances, appeals and adverse actions; per-
    sonal rights of employees; and equal employ-                        Length: days-
    merit OPPOrtunitY complaints- Federal Labor-                        Purpose: To provide knowledge of important
    Management Relations: Rights and duties of                          legal trends and recent developments in mili-
    management and labor under Executive Order                          tary administrative law, judicial review of mili-
    11491, as amended, and DOD Directive 1426.1;                        tary actions, and decisions relating to the oper-
    representation activities; negotiation of labor                     ation of military installations.
    contracts; unfair labor practice complaints; ad-
    ministration of labor contracts and procedures                      Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
    for arbitration of grievances. Government Con-                      nent military attorney or appropriate civilian
    tractors: An overview of the responsibility of                      attorney employed by the u-s. Chernment-
    military officials when government contractors                      Reserve Officers must have                 the
    experience labor disputes.                                          Judge Advocate Officer Graduate Course. Al-
                                                                        though appropriate for reservists, enrollment
                                                                        is not recommended unless the individual is
         LEGAL ASSISTANCE COURSE                                        working in the area covered by the course. The
                           (5F-F23)                                     student i s expected to have experience in the
                                                                        subject area. Security clearance required:
    Length: 3-34 days.
                                                                        None.
    Purpose: A survey of current problems in
                                                                        Substantive Content: New developments in
    Army legal assistance providing knowledge of                        the areas of military administrative law in-
    important legal trends and recent develop-                          cluding military personnel, civilian personnel,
    ments involved in areas of legal assistance ren-
                                                                        military assistance to civil authority, legal basis
    dered to service members.
                                                                        of command (military installation law) and non-
    Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-                        appropriated funds, with particular emphasis
    nent military attorney or appropriate civilian                      on developing case law in the areas of adminis-
    attorney employed by the U.S. Government.                           trative due process, vagueness, and constitu-
    Reserve officers must have completed the                            tionality of regulations, including first and
    Judge Advocate Officer Graduate Course. AI-                         fourteenth amendment considerations. De-
    though appropriate for reservists, enrollment                       velopments in the area of judicial review of
.   is not recommended unless the individual i s                        military activities, including procedures for
    working the area covered by the course. The                         control and management of litigation involving
    student is expected to have experience in the                       the Army is required by AR 2740. The instruc-
    subject area or have attended the Basic or                          tion is presented with the assumption that stu-
    Graduate Course. Security clearance required:                       dents already have a fundamental knowledge of
    None.                                                               the areas covered.
                                                                                      DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                   51
            CLAIMS COURSE                               Substantive Content: Basic principles of en-
               (5F-FZ6)                                 vironmental law as it applies to military instal-
                                                        lations, including the National Environmental
Length: 3 days                                          Policy Act and its requirement for preparation
purpose:T~ provide advanced continuing legal            of environmental impact statements, the Clean
education in the         claims System, includ-         Air Act, and the Federal Water Pollution Con-
ing recent judicia] decisions and statutory and         trol Act. The course also includes a brief dis-
regulatory changes affecting claims.                    cussion of other environmental laws and the
                                                        roles of the Environmental Protection Agency
Prerequisites: U.S. A m y active duty or re-            and the Army Corps of Engineers in environ-
serve component attorney or appropriate civil-          mental regulation.
ian attorney employed by the Department of
the Army. Reserve officers must have com-
pleted the Judge Advocate Officer Graduate                 GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
Course. Although appropriate for reservists,                  PRACTICES COURSE
enrollment is not recommended unless the indi-
vidual is working in the area covered by the                       (5F-F28)
course. The student is expected to have experi-         Length: 2-35 days.
ence in the subject area. Persons who have
completed this course within the past two-year          Purpose: To provide basic knowledge of the
period immediately preceding the date of this           requirements of the Freedom of Information
course are not eligible to attend. Security             Act and the Privacy Act. This course is de-
clearance required: None.                               signed primarily for practicing military lawyers
                                                        in the field.
Substantive Content: Claims against the gov-
ernment. Analysis of claims relating to Military        Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
Personnel and Civilian Employees Claims Act,            nent military lawyer or appropriate civilian at-
Federal Tort Claims Act, National Guard                 torney employed by the U.S. Government. Re-
Claims Act, Foreign Claims Act, and Nonscope            serve officers must have completed the Judge
Claims Act. Recent developments in foregoing            Advocate Officer Basic Course. Persons who
areas will be emphasized. Claims in favor of the        have completed this course within the two-year
Government. Analysis of Federal Claims Col-             period immediately preceding the date of this
lection Act and Federal Medical Care Recovery           course are not eligible to attend. Security
Act with emphasis on recent developments.               clearance required: None.
                                                        Substantive Content: The disclosure require-
                                                        ments of the Freedom of Information Act; the
                                                        exemptions from disclosure and their interpre-
  ENVIRONMENTAL LAW COURSE                              tation by the federal courts; the restrictions on
           (5F-FZ7)                                     the collection, maintenance, and dissemination
Length: 3-!4 days.                                      of personal information imposed by the Privacy
                                                        Act; the relationship between the two Acts and
Purpose: To provide instruction in the basic            their implementation by the Army.
principles of environmental law as they affect
federal installations and activities.
Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-                     LITIGATION COURSE
nent military lawyer or appropriate civilian at-                       (5F-FZ9)
torney employed by the U.S. Government. Re-
                                                        Length: 3-35 days.
serve officers must have completed the Judge
Advocate Officer Basic Course. Security clear-          Purpose: To provide basic knowledge and skill
ance required: None.                                    in handling litigation against the United States
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                    -
                                                                                                                   ,

                                                     52
and officials of the Department of Defense in             Substantive Content: Evidentiary aspects of
both their official and private capacities.               military criminal law practice, including; scien-
                                                          tific evidence, confrontation, compulsory proc-
Prerequisites: Activity duty military lawyer or
                                                          ess, right to counsel, federal and common law
civilian attorney employed by the Department
                                                          rules of evidence, search and seizure, self in-
of Defense. Enrollment is not recommended
                                                          crimination, identification, substantive law of
unless t h e individual is responsible for
                                                          offenses and defenses, and topical aspects of
monitoring, assisting or handling civil litigation
                                                          current military law.
at his or her installation. Anyone who has com-
pleted t h e Army Judge Advocate Officer
Graduate Course (resident) within two years of               MILITARY JUSTICE I1 COURSE
the date of this course is ineligible to attend.                       (5F-F31)
Persons who have completed this course within
the past two-year period immediately preced-              Length: 2 weeks.
ing the date of this course are not eligible to           Purpose: To provide a working knowledge of
attend. Security clearance required: None.                the duties and responsibilities of field grade
Substantive Content: The following areas will             Judge Advocate General's Corps officers in the
be covered: Reviewability and justiciability,             area of military criminal law. This course is
federal jurisdiction and remedies, scope of re-           specifically designed to fulfill one-half of the
view of military activities, exhaustion of mili-          requirements of Phase I1 of the nonresident/
tary remedies, Federal Rules of Civil Proce-              resident Judge Advocate Officer Graduate
dure, civil rights litigation, FTCA litigation,           Course. It also covers one-half of the material
and official immunity. There will be a practical          presented in the USAR School Judge Advocate
exercise in the preparation of litigation reports         Officer Graduate Course ADT Phase 11.                    r"
and pleadings.                                            Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
                                                          nent military attorney, 02-04. Although appro-
                                                          priate for active duty personnel, enrollment is
   MILITARY JUSTICE I COURSE                              not recommended unless the individual is
            (5F-F30)                                      working toward completion of the Graduate
                                                          Course by correspondence. Security clearance
Length: 2 weeks.
                                                          required: None.
Purpose: To provide a working knowledge of
the duties and responsibilities of field grade            Substantive Content: Procedural aspects of
                                                          military criminal law, including; administration
Judge Advocate General's Corps officers in the
                                                          of military criminal law, jurisdiction, pleadings,
area of military criminal law. This course is
specifically designed to fulfill approximately            motions, pleas, preliminary investigations and
one-half of the requirements of Phase I1 of the           reports, court-martial personnel, trial proce-
nonresidenthesident Judge Advocate Officer                dures, post trial review and procedures, ex-
Graduate Course. It also covers approximately             traordinary writs, appellate review, profes-
one-half of the materials presented in the                sional responsibility, and topical aspects of cur-
USAR School Judge Advocate Officer Graduate               rent military law.
Course ADT Phase 11.
Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-                 CRIMINAL TRIAL ADVOCACY
nent military attorney, 02-04. Although appro-                       COURSE
priate for active duty personnel, enrollment is                      (5F-F32)
not recommended unless the individual is
working toward completion of the Graduate                 Length: 4-% days.
Course by correspondence. Security clearance          Purpose: To improve and polish the experi-
required: None.                                       enced trail attorney's advocacy skills.                  -
                                                                                                               e
                                                                                              DA Pam 27-50-69
     “
    (.                                                      53
         Prerequisites: Active duty military attorney            appellate review. Issues in evidence, profes-
         certified as counsel under Article 27b(2),              sional responsibility, procedure, trial advocacy
         UCMJ, with at least six months’ experience as           and topical aspects are considered.
         a trial attorney.
         Substantive Content: Intensive instruction                       CRIMINAL LAW NEW
         and exercises encompass problems confronting                      DEVELOPMENTS
         trial and defense counsel from pretrial investi-
         gation through appellate review. Issues in evi-                       (5F-F35)
         dence, professional responsibility, procedure,          Length: 3 days.
         trial advocacy, and topical aspects of current
         military law are considered.                            Purpose: To provide counsel and criminal law
                                                                 administrators with information regarding re-
                                                                 cent developments and trends in military
              MILITARY JUDGE COURSE                              criminal law. This course is revised annually.
                     (5F-F33)                                    Prerequisites: This course i s limited to active
                                                                 duty judge advocates and civilian attorneys
         Length: 3 weeks.
                                                                 who serve as counsel or administer military
         Purpose: To provide military attorneys ad-              criminal law in a judge advocate office. Stu-
         vanced schooling to qualify them to perform             dents must not have attended TJAGSA resi-
         duties as full-time military judges at courts-          dent criminal law CLE, Basic or Graduate
         martial.                                                courses, within the 12-month period im-
                                                                 mediately preceding the date of the course.
         Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
                                                                 Substan t ive Content: GovernmenVdefense
    f?
         nent military attorneys. Security clearance re-
         quired: None. Army officers are selected for            counsel post trial duties; Speedy trial; pretrial
         attendance by The Judge Advocate General.               agreements; extraordinary writs; 5th Amend-
                                                                 ment and Article 31; search and seizure; recent
         Substantive Content: Trial procedure, sub-
                                                                 trends in the United States Court of Military
         stantive military criminal law, defenses, in-
                                                                 Appeals; Jurisdiction; witness production; men-
         structions, evidence, current military legal
                                                                 tal responsibility; military corrections; plead-
         problems, and professional responsibility.
                                                                 ings; developments in substantive law; topical
                                                                 aspects of current military law.
             DEFENSE TRIAL ADVOCACY
I                   COURSE                                         INTERNATIONAL LAW I COURSE
!                    (5F-F34)                                               (5F-F 40)
         Length: 4 4 days.                                       Length: 2 weeks.
         Purpose: To improve and polish the experi-              Purpose: To provide knowledge of the sources,
         enced trial attorney’s defense advocacy skills.         interpretation and application of international
         Prerequisites: Active duty military attorney            law. This course fulfills approximately one-
         certified as counsel under Article 27b(2),              third of the requirements of phase VI of the
         UCMJ, with 6-12 months’ experience as a trial           nonresidenttresident Judge Advocate Officer
         attorney and with present or prospective im-            Graduate Course. It also covers approximately
         mediate assignment as a defense counsel at the          one-third of the materials presented in the
         trial level. Security clearance required: None.         USAR School Judge Advocate Officer Graduate
                                                                 Course ADT Phase VI.
         Substantive Content: Intensive instruction,
         keyed to defense counsel’s needs, encompass             Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
         problems from pretrial investigation through            nent military attorney, 02-04, or appropriate
    -
    (
    7
    !
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                                        -
                                                                                                                       r

                                                      54
civilian attorney employed by the U.S. Gov-                Conventions and the General Protocols, and
ernment. Enrollment of active duty personnel               their application in military operations and
is not recommended unless the individual is                missions, t o include problems on handling of
working toward completion of the Graduate                  war crimes, control of civilians, Article 5 tri-
Course by correspondence. Security clearance               bunals for the classification of prisoners of war;
required: None.                                            occupation and civil affairs matters; law of war
Substantive Content: The International Legal
                                                           training and the Code of Conduct.
 System: nature, sources and evidences of in-
ternational law; s t a t e rights and respon-                      LAW OF WAR WORKSHOP
sibilities; recognition; nationality; international                       (5F-F42)
agreements; the United Nations and the Inter-
national Court of Justice; international rules of          Length: 4-?4 days.
jurisdiction; status of forces agreements,
policies, practices and current developments;              Purpose: To provide both judge advocate and
foreign claims operations overseas procurement             non-judge advocate officers with basic knowl-
operations; and private aspects of international           edge of the law of war and of the major changes
law.                                                       now impending in this field and of the practical
                                                           aspects of law of war instruction.
                                                           Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
 INTERNATIONAL L A W 11 COURSE                             nent military attorney or appropriate civilian
           (5F-F41)                                        attorney employed by the Department of De-
Length: 2 weeks.                                           fense, as well as non-attorney officers with
                                                           command experience who are to be involved in
Purpose: To provide familiarization with the               any aspect or level of the law of war training
law of war, including customary and conven-                process. P r e f e r a b l y , a t t o r n e y s and non-
tional (Hague and Geneva Conventions) laws,                attorney officers should attend the workshop as
and the national and international legal rules             a teaching team. However, organizations
affecting military operations during times of              wishing to qualify either attorneys or command
                                             hs
peace, of armed conflict and of occupation. T i            experienced officers in the law of war training
course fulfills approximately one-third of the             process may send one or a number of unpaired
requirements of Phase VI of the nonresident/               designees. Security clearance required: None.
resident Judge Advocate Officer Graduate
Course. It also covers approximately one-third         Substantive Content: International customs
of the materials presented in the USAR School          and treaty rules affecting the conduct of forces
Judge Advocate Officer Graduate Course ADT             in military operations in all levels of hostilities,
Phase VI.                                              the Hague and Geneva Conventions and their
Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-           application in military operations, to include
nent military attorney, 02-04, or appropriate          problems on reporting and investigating war
civilian attorney employed by the U.S. Gov-            crimes; treatment and control of civilians;
ernment. Enrollment of active duty personnel           treatment and classification of prisoners of war;
is not recommended unless the individual i s           the substantial change to the law of war im-
working toward completion of the Graduate              pending as a result of the recent adoption in
Course by correspondence. Security clearance           Geneva of the Protocols additional to the 1949
required: None.                                        Geneva Conventions, including extensive new
                                                       obligations of commanders and military attor-
Substantive Content: International customs             neys. Practical emphasis is given to prepara-


                                                                                                                       -
and treaty rules affecting the conduct of U.S.         tion of lesson plans, methods of instruction, and
Military Forces in military operations in all          use of l w of war training materials. Participa-
                                                                a
levels of hostilities; the Hague and Geneva            tion in team teaching exercises is required.
                                                                                        DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                     55
 LEGAL ASPECTS OF TERRORISM                               Substantive Content: Major problem areas and
         U"ATIVE)                                         new developments in military justice, adminis-
           (SF-F43)                                       trative and civil law, procurement, and interna-
                                                          tional law.
Length: 2-34 days.
Purpose:' To provide knowledge of the legal                   LAW OFFICE MANAGEMENT
aspects of terrorism and antiterrorism, focus-                              (7A-713A)
ing on the questions confronting military com-
manders both in the United States and over-               Length: 4-?4 days.
seas concerning terrorism and the legality of             Purpose: To provide a working knowledge of
counter terrorism measures.                               the administrative operations of a staff judge
Prerequisites: Active duty or Reserve Compo-              advocate office and to provide basic concepts of
nent military attorney or appropriate civilian            effective law office management to military
attorney employed by the U.S. Government.                 attorneys, warrant officers, and senior enlisted
Security clearance required: Secret.                      personnel.
Substantive Content: What is the terrorism                Prerequisites: Active duty or reserve compo-
problem, and what measures .are being con-                nent JAGC officer, warrant officer or senior
templated to counter it both within and outside           enlisted personnel in grade E-WE-9 in any
the United States; relevant international law             branch of the armed- services. Persons who
and agreements, and national legislation in               have completed this course or the Graduate
regard to terrorism; the use of force and lim-            Course within the three-year period preceding
itations on the use of force in foreign countries;        the date of this course are not eligible to
legal rules applicable t o terrorism during               attend. Officers who have been selected for
armed conflict; counter terrorism authority of            Graduate Course attendance also are ineligible
U.S. commanders overseas; the use of force to             to attend. Security clearance required: None.
counter terrorism within the United States                Substantive Content: Management theory in-
both on and off federal installations; the Posse          cluding formal and informal organizations,
Comitatus Act; relationships within DOD, with             motivation and communication. Law office
federal or local agencies outside DOD, and in             management techniques, including effective
regard to other states.                                   management of military and civilian personnel
                                                          and equipment, and control of budget and office
      STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE                                actions.
       ORIENTATION COURSE
              (5F-F52)                                     MILITARY LAWYER'S ASSISTANT
Length: 4-34 days.                                                    COURSE
Purpose: To inform newly assigned staff judge
                                                                   (512-71D/20/50)
advocates of current trends and developments              Length: 7-34days.
in all areas of military law.                             Purpose: The course provides essential train-
Prerequisites: Active duty field grade Army               ing in the law for legal clerks and civilian
judge advocate whose actual or anticipated                employees who work as professional assistants
assignment is as a staff judge advocate or                to Army judge advocate attorneys. The course
deputy staff judge advocate of a command with             is specifically designed to meet the needs of the
general court-martial jurisdiction. Security              Army legal clerk, MOS 71D, for skill level
clearance required: None.                                 three training in paralegal duties.
Selection for attendance is by the Judge Advo-            Prerequisites: The course i s open only to en-
a t e General.                                            listed service members and civilian employees
DA Pam 27-50-69                                                                                             n

                                                    66
who are serving as paraprofessionals in a mili-          criminal law. The course builds on the prereq-
tary legal office, or whose immediate future             uisite foundation of field experience and corre-
assignment entails providing professional as-            spondence course study. Coverage includes
sistance to an attorney. Students must have,             administrative procedures; legal assistance
served a minimum of one year in a legal                  areas of family law, consumer protection,
clerWlega1 paraprofessional position and must            landlord-tenant and taxation; military criminal
have satisfactorily completed the Law for                law areas of crimes arid defenses, role of court
Legal Clerks Correspondence Course.                      personnel, jurisdiction, pretrial procedures and
                                                         evidence; legal research; written communica-
Substantive Content: The course focuses on
Army legal practice, with emphasis on the                tion; interviewing techniques; and professional
                                                         responsibility.
client service aspects of legal assistance and

                               JAGC PERSONNEL SECTION
                                          PPTO, OTJAG
1. Change in policy concerning the submis-               the record of board proceedings maintained by
sion and filing of letters of communication to           MILPERCEN.
DA officer and enlisted promotion selection


                                                                                                            -
boards.                                                  5. Letters of communication and recommenda-
                                                         tion for promotion should not be forwarded to
The Military Personnel Center (MILPERCEN)                MILPERCEN in care of the president of the
has announced the following procedures:                  appropriate board until t h e HQDA mes-
1. Current procedures permit officers in the             sage announcing the zone of consideration is
primary zone of consideration and senior en-             dispatched.
listed personnel in the primary and secondary
                                                         6. In the past, some members used letters of
zones of consideration to communicate directly
                                                         communication to promotion selection boards as
by letter t o presidents of centralized promotion
boards. In addition, current procedures allow            a means to insure that documents of career
any party to write a letter t o a selection board        importance are added to their OMPF. This
                                                         means of filing update is no longer available.
recommending an enlisted member for promo-
tion. All such letters considered by boards are          Therefore, OMPF material will not be attached
subsequently filed in the Official Military Per-         to communications addressed to the promotion
sonnel File (OMPF).                                      selection board but will be submitted through
                                                         the local military personnel office (MILPO). A
2. Procedures are being changed to provide               special records section has been established
that letters of recommendation for promotion             within the Officer Personnel Records Branch in
concerning enlisted personnel will be restricted         MILPERCEN and a t the Enlisted Records and
to soldiers in the primary zone and accepted             Evaluation Center, Fort Benjamin Harrison, to
only from their current chain of command/                expeditiously process on a priority basis OMPF
supervision.                                             updated for personnel in the primary zone of
3. Effective 1 August 1978, only letters from            consideration. Documents for officer OMPF
officer and enlisted personnel in the primary            update should be sent to Commander, MIL-
zones of consideration will be accepted.                 PERCEN ATTN: DAPC-PSR-RP, 200 Stovall
                                                         Street, Alexandria, VA 22332. Documents per-
4. Effective 1 August 1978, AR 640-10 will               taining to enlisted personnel should be sent to
prohibit the filing of all such letters in the           Commander, Enlisted Records and Evaluation
OMPF. These letters, to include inclosures,              Center, ATTN: PCREXX, Fort Benjamin Har-
will be considered as privileged correspondence          rison, I N 46216. A letter o f transmittal indi-
for board purposes only and will be filed with           cating name, grade, social security number and     r
    6
                                                                                         DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                    57
the identification of the selection board by             ance with current procedures. Additionally,
which the individual i s being considered should         only those documents authorized for file by AR
be used. Documents pertaining to personnel not           640-10 will be accepted, processed, and for-
in a primary zone of consideration should con-           warded to promotion selection boards.
tinue to be forwarded by the MILPO in accord-

2. Assignments.
     NAME                                          FROM                               TO
                                             COLONELS
Hammack, Ralph                    USALSA, WASH, DC                     USALSA wlduty sta
                                                                       Yongsan, Korea

                                     LIEUTENANT COLONELS
Coleman, Gerald                   APG, MD                              2d Armd Div, Germany
Hanft, John                       USALSA, WASH, DC                     USALSA wlduty sta
                                                                       Ft. Belvoir, VA
Steward, Ronald                   Ft. Riley, KS                        USALSA wtduty sta
                                                                       Nurnberg, Germany
Wilson, Norman                    Ft. Leonard Wood, MO                 USALSA wlduty sta
                                                                       Ft. Lesvenworth, KS

                                                MAJORS

Bogan, Robert                     Korea                                Okinawa
Cruden, John,                     USAREUR                              OTJAG, WASH, DC
Fulbruge, Charles                 Ft. Ord, CA                          8th Army, Korea
Kittel, Robert                    Hawaii                               AFIP, WASH, DC
Linebarger, Jan                   OTJAG, WASH, DC                      VI1 CORPS, APO NY
Millard, Arthur                   Presidio of SF                       Ft. McPherson, GA

                                             CAPTAINS
Baldwin, William                  Ft. Ben Harrison, IN                 88th Basic Class, TJAGSA
Barbee, John                      Korea                                Ft. Houston, TX
Blomstrom, John                   USAREUR                              Ft. Houston, TX
Bornhorst, David                  Ft. Jackson, SC                      27th Advanced Course,
                                                                       TJAGSA
Bowe, Thomas                      USAREUR                              Korea
Bragaw, Rexford                   USAREUR                              USALSA, Bailey Crossroads, VA
Bressler, Stephen                 USAREUR                              Ft. Houston, TX
Brunson, Frank                    Ft. Hood, TX                         S&F TJAGSA
Caldwell, Joe                     USAREUR                              USALSA, Bailey Crossroads, VA
Camblin, Edward                   Ft. Hood, TX                         Korea
Cornelison, Joseph                Ft. Ben Harrison, IN                 87th Basic Course, TJAGSA
Dontonio, Gregory                 Korea                                Ft. Huachuca, A 2
Ferraro, Peter                    Ft. Hood, TX                         USALSA, WASH, DC
Flanigan, Richard                 USAREUR                              S & F , USMA
DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                          58
     NAME                                             FROM                                        TO
Gallaway, Robert                       USAREUR                                    USALSA, WASH, DC
Gibson, Fred                           Ft. Polk, LA                               USALSA, WASH, DC
Goforth, Charles                       S&F,TJAGSA                                Space & Bld Mgt, DSSW
                                                                                 WASH, DC
Keating, Everet                       Ft. Carson, CO                             USALSA, WASH, DC
Keefe, Thaddeus                       Korea                                      Ft. Houston, TX
Monahan, Eugene                       Korea                                      Ft. Belvoir, VA
Mora, Raul                            USACC, APO CA                              Southport, NC
Perrault, Donald                      USAREUR                                    USALSA, WASH, DC
Pupko, Walter                         Ft. Campbell, KY                           Korea
Raymond, William                      Korea                                      Ft. Ord, CA
Reade, Robert                         Korea                                      Ft. Bragg, NC
Roup, Rolland                         Ft. Lewis, WA                              USALSA, WASH, DC
Rutter, Mark                          Ft. Polk, LA                               EUCOM SPT ACT, IRAN
Scholz, Steven                        Korea                                      Presidio of SF
Smith, Gary                           Ft. Gordon, GA                             Korea
Spitz, Terry                          USAREUR                                    USALSA, WASH, DC
Suessmann, Michael                    USAREUR                                    St. Louis, MO
Thiele, Alan                          Korea                                      Ft. Sheridan, I L
Trudo, Martha                         Korea                                      Ft. Hood, TX
Vangoor, Stephen                      Alaska                                     Korea
Wheeler, Courtny                      USAREUR                                    USALSA, WASH, DC
Winter, Marion                        Canal Zone                                 Ft. Meade, MD
Wolski, James                         Ft. Sheridan, I L                          Korea
Zimmerman, John                       Ft. Ord. CA                                Korea

                                           WARRANT OFFICERS
Bailey, Dennis                        Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD               Ft. Gordon, GA
Betteridge, Kenneth                   Ft. Sill, OK                               Hawaii
Hall, William                         USAREUR                                    Ft. Rucker. AL



3. Legal clerks and court reporters in grade                   Morlang, Wesley W.          Sanders, Needham S.
E-6 (SSG or SP6) selected for participation in                 Nimmo, Richard W.           Shaw, Charles B.
                                                               Pagel, Walter W.            Speer, Jeffrey M.
Advanced Noncommissioned Officers’ Educa-                      Perkins, Stephen P.         Thiel, James M.
tion System.                                                   Phillips, Ronald E.         Welder, Russel
                       MOS 71D                                 Pollard, Darrell 0.         Welsh, Michael J.
Aschutz, Michael A.       Gahan, Gibson W.                     Rowland. Steven, S.         Whittington, Eddie
Brooka, Clifford T.       Hutchins, Herman C
Bornasrovira, C.          Jose, Dalton Dale                                           MOS 71E
Bradshaw, Robert L.       Long, Joe, Jr.                       Andre, Robert J.           Hughley, Linda M.
Carson, Billy Joseph      Mackay, Edward                       Anthony, Robert L.         Lewis Paul
Colley, Thomas B.         McCarl, William R.                   Bryant, Terry W.           McArthur, Lawrence
Dunhan, William J.        McElyea, Jimmy E .                   Caldwell, William D.       Olsen, Janice G.
Farmer, Charles D.        McQuigg, William D.                  Dimato, Marylin C.         Penvose, Thomas L.
                                                                                      DA Pam 27-50-69
                                                    59
                                Current Materials of Interest
Articles and Comments                                      Jones & Findler, The Freedom of Informa-
                                                         tion Act in Military Aircrash Cases, 43 J. OF
  Bohmfalk, Property Rights of Non-Marital               AIR L. AND COM. 535 (1977).
Partners in Meretricious Cohabitation, 13
NEWENG.L. REV. 453 (1978).                                 Dennis R. Nolan, Public Sector Collective
                                                         Bargaining: Defining the Federal Role, 63
   Daniel C. Cohn, Displacement of State Rules           CORNELL L. REV. 419 (1978).
of Decision in Construing Releases of Federal
Claims, 63 CORNELL REV.339 (1978).
                     L.                                     S. G. Potach, New Protection Against the
                                                         Unethical Bil l Collector: Debtor's Remedies
  DeKieffer and Hartquist, T r a n s k e i : A           Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act,
Legitimate Birth, 13 NEW ENG. L. REV. 428                                 L.
                                                         11 CREIGHTON REV.895 (1978).
(1978).
                                                            Rollins, A l i m o n y Considerations Under
  V. Fontana, D. Besharov, and J. Redeker,               No-Fault Divorce Laws, 57 NEB. L. REV. 792
Symposium-The Medical, Legislative, and                  (1978).
Legal Aspects of Child Abuse and Neglect, 23                Nancy Rebecca Shaw, Common Law Mar-
VILL. L. REV. 445 (1978).                                riage and Unmarried Cohabitation: An Old
   Elizabeth T. Geibel, International Protec-            Solution to a New Problem, 39 U. PITT. L.
tion of Individual H u m a n Rights: Implications        REV. 579 (1978).
of Individual Status, 1 HOUS. J. INT'LL. 55                 William H. Simons, The Idealogy of Advo-
(1978).                                                  cacy: Procedural Justice and Professional
  Michael H. Graham, The Confrontation                   Ethics, 1978 WISC. L. REV. 29.
Clause, the Hearsay Rule and the Forgetful                  Benjamin A. Sims, Soviet Military Law:
Witness, 56 TEX. L. REV. 151 (1978).                     Judicial and Non-Judicial Punishment, 13
                                                         NEW ENG.L. REV. 381 (1978).
  D. L. Heffinger, Marital Deduction Plan-
ning, 11 CREIGHTON REV. 679 (1978).
                   L.                                       Alphonse M. Squillante, Comments on the
                                                         Fair Debt Collection Practices Act-Title V I I I
  Eric M. Holmes, A Contextual Study of                  of the Consumer Credit Protection A c t , 32
Commercial Good Faith: Good-Faith Disclo-                PERS.FINANCE Q. REP. 69 (1978).
                                                                          L.
sure in Contract Formation, 39 U . PITT. L.
REV. 381 (1978).                                            L. Stein, Recent Developments: Federal G v t
                                                         T a x and Estate Tax-Interest-Free Loans-
  Icenogle, Capacity of Minors to be Charge-             Intrafamil y Interest-Free Loans are not
able with Negligence and Their Standard of               Taxable Transfers f o r Purposes of I.R.C 0
Care, 57 NEB. L. REV. 763 (1978).                        2501. Crown v. Commissioner (T.C. 1977), 23
  J. Isralsky, Bakke-Uncertain Direction on              VILL. L. REV. 625 (1978).
Affirmative Action, 7 N.L.A.D.A. WASHING-                   Kathryn Taylor, Equal Credit f o r All: Art
TON MEMO 1 (August 1978).                                Analysis of the 1976 Amendments to the Equal
   Walter H. E. Jaeger, An Emerging Concept:             Credit Opportunity Act, 1978 WISC. L. REV.
Consumer Protections in Statutory Regula-                326.
tions, Products Liability and the Sale of New              Edwin Vieira, Jr., Are Public-Sector Unions
Homes, 11 VAL. U. L. REV. 335 (1977), con-               Special Interest Political Parties? 27 DEPAUL
densed in 27 L. REV. DIG. 4 (May/June 1978).             L. REV. 293 (1978).
.-
                                                                                   DA Pam 27-50-69
(1
 By Order of the Secretary of the Army:
                                                                           BERNARD W. ROGERS
                                                                          General, United States Army
                                                                                 Chief ofstaff
 Official:
          J. C. PENNINGTON
 Brigadier General, United States A m y
         The Adjutant General




                                  U.B. GOVEPNHENT PPINTING OFFICE: 1978

								
To top