DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

CRS
Docket No: 3297-01
6 September 2001

Dear:

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552.

Your allegations of error and

In addition, the Board considered the advisory

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 6 September 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 16 July
2001, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled  to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.

In this connection, the Board substantially

The names and

Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosure

2

DEPARTMENT OF THE 

NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

2 NAW ANNEX

WASHINGTON, DC 20380-1775

IN REPLY REFER To:

1070
JAM4

16 

JUL 

LUUl

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

(BCNR) APPLICATION

1.
We are asked to provide an opinion on Petitioner's request
for the removal from his service record book (SRB) and official
military personnel file  
nonjudicial punishment  
Petitioner also requests restoration of all property,
privileges, and rights affected by his NJP.
Petitioner requests that BCNR upgrade the characterization of
his Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge.

(OMPF) of all entries related to the

(NJP) he received on 26 August 1980.

In addition,

We recommend that the requested relief be denied.

2 .
analysis follows.

Our

3 .

Background

a.

On 27 April 1980, Petitioner received NJP (his first)

for disrespect in violation of Article 91 of the UCMJ.
Petitioner was awarded a forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for
The suspended forfeiture was
1 month, suspended for 3 months.
subsequently vacated on 16 June 1980.

b.

On 16 June 1980, Petitioner also received NJP for

unauthorized absence in violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ.
Petitioner was awarded a forfeiture of $25.00 pay per month for
1 month.

C .

On  20  July 1980,

wrongfully communicating a threat in violation of Article 134 of
the UCMJ.
per month for 1 month and 7 days correctional custody.

Petitioner was awarded a forfeiture of $100.00 pay

Petitioner received NJP (his third) for

d.

On 15 June 1981, Petitioner received NJP (his fourth)

for unauthorized absence in violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ.
Petitioner was awarded a forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for
1 month, 10 days restriction, and 10 days extra duty.
punishment was suspended for 3 months.

All

Subj:

BOARD FOR CORR

N

e.

On 27 June 1981, Petitioner received NJP (his fifth) for
Petitioner

disrespect in violation of Article 91 of the UCMJ.
was awarded a forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 1 month,
14 days restriction, and 14 days extra duty.
Forfeiture was
suspended for 4 months.

f.

On 26 August 1981,

Petitioner received NJP (his sixth)
for unauthorized absence in violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ.
Petitioner, then a lance corporal, pay grade E-3, was awarded a
reduction to pay grade E-2 and a forfeiture of $75.00 pay per
month for 1 month.

g-

On 2 September 1981,

Petitioner was notified that as a

result of his pattern of misconduct he was being processed for
administrative separation with an Under Other Than Honorable
Conditions characterization of service.

h.

On 19 September 1981,

Petitioner received NJP (his

seventh) for drunk and disorderly conduct in violation of
Article 134 of the UCMJ.
Petitioner was awarded 14 days
restriction.

i.

On 20 September 1981,

Petitioner received NJP (his

eighth) for breaking restriction in violation of Article 134 of
the UCMJ.
  $130.00 pay
per month for 1 month and   3 days confinement on bread and water.

Petitioner was awarded a forfeiture of

j.

On 24 September 1981,

Petitioner received NJP (his
ninth)for  disrespect in violation of Article 89 of the UCMJ.
Petitioner was awarded a forfeiture of $130.00 pay per month for
1 month and 3 days confinement on bread and water.

k.

On 6 January 1982,

Petitioner was again notified that as

a result of his pattern of misconduct he was being processed for
administrative separation with an Under Other Than Honorable
characterization of service.
Petitioner was advised of his
right to consult with an attorney and his right to an
administrative separation board.
his rights and was discharged with an Under Other Than Honorable
Conditions characterization of service on 22 January 1982.

Petitioner elected to waive

Analysis.

4.
of Petitioner's 9 separate  
requests  that  BCNR reinstate him to the rank of lance corporal,

No legal error occurred in the imposition of any

Petitioner, however, now

NJP's.

2

.

Subj:

ATION

Petitioner's

that too is an offense under the Code. In

In addition, Petitioner requests that BCNR

pay grade E-3.
upgrade his characterization of service.
application is nearly incoherent and unsupported by evidence.
Petitioner appears to claim that his rank reduction was the
result of a fight rather than unauthorized absence as indicated
in his service record.
Even assuming that this one NJP was a
result of a fight;
support of this claim Petitioner alludes to a statement attached
to a DD 293 sent to an unnamed individual or organization in
Arlington, Virginia.
Absent additional information we are
unable to obtain or evaluate the relevance of this statement.
Similarly, Petitioner indicates that Case #  
314/212B at the
Veteran's Affairs Regional Office in Roanoke, Virginia supports
his claim but fails to attach a copy of this case file to his
application.
official records,
the burden is on the Petitioner to establish
any irregularity.
Petitioner has failed to meet
that burden by failing to provide any evidence to establish his
vague claim of error or injustice.
Petitioner's claims are more than 10 years old and beyond the
established guidelines for the correction of naval records.

Given that a presumption of regularity attaches to

In this case,

Finally we note that

Conclusion.

5 .
Petitioner's request for relief be denied.

For the reasons noted, we recommend that

Judge Advocate Division