What is the name of your state? APO, AE.
To keep a very long story short, I'll just do a time line.
Feb 06. Arrive at unit. Assigned Truck that has been deadlined (according to verbal reports by other Soldier in the section) since unit returned from Iraq in 2004.
Feb 07. Fed up with Maintenance Section refusing to take measures to repair or replace truck (or even report it as Non-Mission Capable) for a year. Report situation to Battalion Maintenance Office (BMO), as well as bring proof that operators have reported the problem for a year. BMO looks at truck, verifies problem, and orders Maintenance Tech (WO1) to fix said vehicle (still not fixed to this date, 10 May 2007).
20 Apr 07. Operating another vehicle in the Motorpool (not even moving, still filling tanks with air) when the transmission fails, dumping all the fluid on the ground. WO1 accuses me of "Neutral-Slamming" truck from the rev-limiter to blow transmission. Investigated IAW AR 15-6, no negligence found. Just a transmission pump failure.
9 May 07. Acting under my role as an AMVI (Army Motor Vehicle Instructor). A student driver is rolling down highway at 45 mph, and 2 tires (dual wheels) come off of the trailer simultaneously (yeah, all of our trucks are in poor repair). Initial evidence suggests improper reassembly during last service. Upon returning to the motorpool, the Motor Sergeant (MSG) makes the same determination, and vows to have the trailer re-serviced next week (this trailer was the "guinea pig", the first in the fleet to undergo this type of service and has had multiple failures on the road since returning to the operational fleet).
10 May 07. WO1 lights up with glee when he finds out that I was the instructor in the vehicle. Suddenly, the CO wants to see the tires that came off, and look at the trailer. The WO1 is claiming improper pre-operation checks caused the wheels to come off (loose lugnuts, even though the inner lugnuts are still on the hub).
I have a feeling that I will be undergoing another 15-6 investigation, only a week after the previous investigation was completed. It is my belief that the WO1 is trying to use me as a scapegoat to cover for improper maintenance and services by his troops. If I find out next week that I am once again under investigation (and subsequently vindicated), how can I initiate proceedings via ART. 138 for Reprisal (reporting him to BMO)? Are there other routes to take (Defamation or Slander)? Hopefully COL Badapple has some experience in these matters.
Thanks.
To keep a very long story short, I'll just do a time line.
Feb 06. Arrive at unit. Assigned Truck that has been deadlined (according to verbal reports by other Soldier in the section) since unit returned from Iraq in 2004.
Feb 07. Fed up with Maintenance Section refusing to take measures to repair or replace truck (or even report it as Non-Mission Capable) for a year. Report situation to Battalion Maintenance Office (BMO), as well as bring proof that operators have reported the problem for a year. BMO looks at truck, verifies problem, and orders Maintenance Tech (WO1) to fix said vehicle (still not fixed to this date, 10 May 2007).
20 Apr 07. Operating another vehicle in the Motorpool (not even moving, still filling tanks with air) when the transmission fails, dumping all the fluid on the ground. WO1 accuses me of "Neutral-Slamming" truck from the rev-limiter to blow transmission. Investigated IAW AR 15-6, no negligence found. Just a transmission pump failure.
9 May 07. Acting under my role as an AMVI (Army Motor Vehicle Instructor). A student driver is rolling down highway at 45 mph, and 2 tires (dual wheels) come off of the trailer simultaneously (yeah, all of our trucks are in poor repair). Initial evidence suggests improper reassembly during last service. Upon returning to the motorpool, the Motor Sergeant (MSG) makes the same determination, and vows to have the trailer re-serviced next week (this trailer was the "guinea pig", the first in the fleet to undergo this type of service and has had multiple failures on the road since returning to the operational fleet).
10 May 07. WO1 lights up with glee when he finds out that I was the instructor in the vehicle. Suddenly, the CO wants to see the tires that came off, and look at the trailer. The WO1 is claiming improper pre-operation checks caused the wheels to come off (loose lugnuts, even though the inner lugnuts are still on the hub).
I have a feeling that I will be undergoing another 15-6 investigation, only a week after the previous investigation was completed. It is my belief that the WO1 is trying to use me as a scapegoat to cover for improper maintenance and services by his troops. If I find out next week that I am once again under investigation (and subsequently vindicated), how can I initiate proceedings via ART. 138 for Reprisal (reporting him to BMO)? Are there other routes to take (Defamation or Slander)? Hopefully COL Badapple has some experience in these matters.
Thanks.