DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

CRS
Docket No:   8458-00
26 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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 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
2001 , a copy of which is attached.

In addition, the Board considered the advisory
  11 June

Your allegations of error and

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.
The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

In this connection, the Board substantially

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken.
You are entitled to have the
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.

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

 

ncADQUARTERS UN I TED STATES MAR I NE 

CORPa

2 NAVY ANNEX

W ASH I NGTON

,  DC 20380

- 1775

IN REPLY REFER TO.

1070
JAM4
1 1 JUN 

2001

MEMORANDUM

FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

(BCNR) APPLICATION

We are asked to provide an opinion

1.
for the removal from his service record book (SRB) and his
official military personnel file (OMPF) of all entries related
to his non-judicial punishment (NJP) of 17 June 1994.

on Petitioner's request

_.-

We recommend that the requested relief be denied.

2 .
analysis follows.

Our

3.

Backaround

a.

On 25 March 1994,

Petitioner was involved in a hazing

incident during which a fellow Marine was held down,
his clothing,
in his rectum.

and threatened with having a celery stick inserted

stripped of

b.

On 17 June 1994, Petitioner, then a lance corporal, pay
received NJP for disobedience of a lawful order and

grade E-3,
assault in violation of Articles 92 and 128 of the UCMJ,
respectively.
grade of E-2,
and 60 days restriction.

Petitioner was awarded a reduction to the pay
forfeiture of $450.00 pay per month for 2 months,

Petitioner appealed.

C .

On  15 July 1994,

Petitioner's commanding officer

remitted the remaining portion of the 60-day restriction
Petitioner was awarded at NJP.

d.

On 9 September 1994,

Petitioner's NJP appeal was granted
Specifically, the charge alleging
in part and denied in part.
disobedience of a lawful order in violation of Article 92 of the
UCMJ was dismissed.
however, was set aside.

No portion of Petitioner's punishment,

4.

Analysis

a.

No legal error occurred in the imposition of NJP.

Petitioner, however,
his record because:

now requests that his NJP be removed from
(1) the page-12 entry recording his NJP was

',

Subj:

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR) APPLICATION

(2) the page-12 entry recording

entered 3 months after his NJP;
his NJP was entered without his signature; (3) the page-12 entry
recording his NJP does not clearly or accurately state what he
was charged with and found guilty of;
abt June 93 and 940325"
two NJP occurred, and;
remaining portion of his restriction is false.

is false and gives the impression that
(5) the page-12 entry remitting the

(4) the statement "on or

b.

Petitioner's claim that  

hisNJP  should be removed from

his record because it was not entered into his SRB until three
While prompt record
months after his NJP is without merit.
keeping is desirable, it is not required.
5002.8 of the Marine Corps Individual Records Administration
Manual 
SRB.

(IRAM) authorizes late entries to be made in a Marine's

Moreover, paragraph

_.-

C .

Petitioner's claim that his NJP should be removed from

his record because it was entered into his SRB without his
4007.2a of the  
signature is without merit.
requires'page-12 entries recording NJP to be signed by the
commander or a designated representative not the Marine
receiving NJP.

Paragraph 

IRAM

The 

page-

d.

IRAM for

Petitioner's claim that his NJP should be removed from
his record because the page-12 entry recording his NJP does not
clearly state what he was charged with because the charge of
violating Article 92 was dismissed is without merit.
12 entry recording Petitioner's NJP satisfies all the
requirements set out in paragraph  
4007.2b  of the  
On 9 September
recording NJP on page-12 of a Marine's SRB.
1994, Petitioner's commanding officer granted Petitioner's NJP
appeal in part by dismissing the charge of violating Article 92
of the UCMJ.
appropriate counter-entry,
of violating Article 92,
12 the same day.
reflects his record of service.
were correct at most the error would require redacting that
portion of the page-12 entry recording the charge of violating
Article 92 of the UCMJ.
recording the charge of violating Article 128 of the UCMJ,
however, would properly remain part of Petitioner's SRB and OMPF
because the charge of violating Article 128 was not dismissed.

UCMJ, was entered on Petitioner's  
Petitioner's page-12, therefore, accurately

That portion of the page-12 entry

In accordance with paragraph  

Moreover, even if petitioner

recording the dismissal of the charge

4001.4d, an

page-

2

.

.
. 

Subj:

BOARD FOR

) APPLICATION

e.

Petitioner's claim that his NJP should be removed from

Petitioner incorrectly asserts that the

is misleading because it

It does not.
does erroneously give the impression that

his record because it is misleading does‘not provide grounds for
the relief he requests.
statement "on or abt Jun 93 and 940325"
gives the impression that he received two NJP.
This entry, however,
he was involved in two separate incidents of hazing and,
This issue, however, is moot
therefore,
._.-
given that the charge of violating Article 92 was dismissed and
the appropriate counter-entry has been made on Petitioner's
page-12 as discussed in paragraph d above.
the issue were not moot,
removing all record of Petitioner NJP.
amending the misleading statement to read "on or abt 940325."

It would only require

should be corrected.

correcting this entry would not require

Furthermore, even if

f.

Petitioner's claim that his NJP should be removed from
his record because the entry remitting the un-served portion of
his restriction is false is without merit.
Given that a
presumption of regularity attaches to official records, the
burden is on the Petitioner to establish any irregularity.
Petitioner has failed to meet this burden because he provides no
evidence to support his claim that he served his entire
restriction.
irregularity would properly be corrected by removing the entry
remitting the un-served portion of his restriction.
the error would not require removing all entries related to his
NJP.

Moreover, even if he provided such evidence that

Correcting

Conclusion.

5.
Accordingly,
request for relief be denied.

we recommend that Petitioner's

Head,
Judge Advocate Division

Military  Law Branch

.