Should an alternate armorer be signed for property book items?

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 00:24:12 -0500

All items are currently signed for by the primary armorer, but it's been proposed that it all gets split since we have two separate arms rooms. I was told that this is legit and also that it's against regs, but I have yet to find anything to support either side in 710-2 or 190-11. Any assistance would be appreciated.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 16 at 2017 12:25 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 00:25:02 -0500

Response by SGT Joseph Gunderson made Nov 16 at 2017 12:29 AM

SGT Joseph Gunderson — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 00:29:14 -0500

No. Never. The only person that is signed for anything that is not assigned out is the commander. The arms room is owned by the commander. Everything in there can be handreceipted or issued to elements in the TCB but the armorer is not signed for anything.

Response by SGT Joseph Gunderson made Nov 16 at 2017 12:30 AM

SGT Joseph Gunderson — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 00:30:55 -0500

The Commander can choose to have the primary armorer sign for the equipment, and should, but the alternate armorer should only sign for the equipment if the primary is going to be gone for a long period of time. As an alt I signed for the property when my primary went to pathfinder school. Otherwise it should always stay with the primary.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Nov 16 at 2017 5:40 AM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 05:40:02 -0500

Only the primary should sign, that way if anything comes up missing or is unaccountable, there isn't someone place the blame on the other.

Response by SGT David T. made Nov 16 at 2017 9:33 AM

SGT David T. — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:33:13 -0500

Why isn't the commander the one signed for it on the property book? I know I been out a long time but the commander should always be the one on the property book then sub hand receipts it down normally through the supply section.

Response by SSG Kenneth Lanning made Nov 16 at 2017 10:15 AM

SSG Kenneth Lanning — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 10:15:25 -0500

If the alternate is in charge of a separate arms room they should DEFINTELY sign for, at least via sub hand receipt. It is NOT against regulations if the person signing for the arms room has unaccompanied access and all the prerequisites for maintaining an arms room (I have been an armorer for three different units, one of which was consolidated for the BN, and worked in supply). Your unit commander is signed for everything in the unit, but the accountable/responsible party (aka the primary armorer) should be on the hand receipt books for it...if that individual is not the one primarily responsible for certain items, they can (and should) be sub hand receipted down.

Response by SGT Tony Clifford made Nov 16 at 2017 1:48 PM

SGT Tony Clifford — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 13:48:26 -0500

The only person on the property book is the commander. It can be sub-hand receipted to whomever is designated. Now if you're the only one with keys to that armsroom then you'd be the one. If the primary has keys to both he's the guy.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 9:10 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 09:10:08 -0500

So the truth is you can be asked to sign for anything you are responsible for, so if you primarily work in this second arms room them there should be no issue with you signing for the equipment. Also if the primary is junior to yourself and you are there to supervise then you could also be asked to sign for the equipment as you may be more responsible. Why would you not want to sign for the equipment, arms room equipment is the easiest to keep up with.

Response by SSG Ricky Johnson made Jan 10 at 2021 6:53 PM

SSG Ricky Johnson — Sun, 10 Jan 2021 18:53:23 -0500

The Commander is responsible for all property assigned to him/her via a number of different authorization documents include, but not limited to: TOE/MTOE, TDA, Special Project, etc. The Commander may (though it’s very unwise) to keep responsibility for all property. The Commanders authority to appoint a Property Book Office (PBO) (various regulations allow this, AR 710-2, AR 735-5 and more, remember I’ve been away since 2007. The PBO appoints Hand Receipt Holders (HRH) whom may be an officer, warrant officer, enlisted, or DoD civilian. Now this will be contentious, but I’ve won this battle every time, NEVER a contractor. If you want to give a contractor equipment, it MUST BE ADDED TO THE CONTRACT. When it’s added to the contract, the PBO will adjust the PB as a loss. Most PBOs always try to fight this but they will lose that argument. Federal Property Management Laws forbid the government from reporting the same item twice in the reports to congress. Alright back to the question, can a PBO require an armorer and an assistant armorer to sign for property. Yes, and no. The armorer would be the Primary HRH. The assistant armorer would be a Sub/HRH, signing for property from the HRH, and not the PBO.