DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL
2 NAVY ANNE
X
RECORD
S
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
CRS
Docket No:
6 November 2002
5050-02
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 6 November 2002.
Your allegations of error and
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.
In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 3 June 2002,
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.
The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
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.
In this connection, the Board substantially
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
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON, DC 20380-1775
MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL
RECORDS
Sub;:
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
IN THE CASE OF
(BCNR)
APPLICA'I'ION
are asked to provide an opinion on
1. We
for the removal from his service record book
(SRB) and
military personnel file (OMPF) of all entries related to the
non-judicial punishment (NJP) he received on
21 October- 1991.
Petitioner's request
official
We recommend that the requested relief be denied.
2.
analysis follows.
Our
Background.
paygrade E-4, disobedience of
and malingering in violation of Articles
On 21 October 1991, Petitioner, then a private
paygrade E-2, U.S. Marine Corps Reserve, received
3 .
first class,
NJP for disrespect to a corporal,
a lawful order,
134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
disrespected a corporal by saying, "Leave him alone" and "If you
want to kick someone's ass, kick mine," disobeyed an order to
get back in formation, and misrepresented medical instructions
to avoid full duty status while in the field.
imposed a forfeiture of $170.00 pay per month for 1 month, 14
days restriction, and 14 days extra duties.
suspended the 14 days restriction and 14 days extra duties for a
period of 6 months.
Petitioner did not appeal his NJP.
91 and
Petitioner
The NJP authority
The NJP authority
Analysis.
The burden is on the Petitioner to
Petitioner contends that he thought the corporal
4.
whom he disrespected was beating a member of his squad therefore
giving him the right to confront the corporal.
claim is without merit.
provide evidence that the record is erroneous.
not offered any evidence that his NJP was unjust, that he was
denied any rights, or was otherwise treated unfairly.
that due to the fact that over 10 years has passed since
Petitioner's NJP, documentary evidence of his NJP no longer
exists.
a mistake by confronting the corporal.
authority was in a better position to understand and weigh all
relevant facts surrounding Petitioner's offenses before imposing
However, Petitioner admits in his petition that he made
Moreover, the NJP
Petitioner has
Petitioner's
We note
Subj:
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
(BCNR) APPLICATION
NJP.
puni
Finally,
Petitioner was afforded the right to appeal his
shment
but- elected not to do so.
Conclusion.
5.
recommend
tliat the requested relief be denied.
Accordingly,
for the reasons noted, we
Head, Military
Judge Advocate Division
Law Branch
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01487-02
paygrade E-4, was awarded reduction to paygrade E-3, forfeiture of $600.00 pay per month for 2 The NJP authority suspended Enclosure (1) pertains. Based on the documentary evidence Moreover, Similarly, Petitioner was informed the NJP proceeding was conducted Petitioner makes no claim that her request for If Petitioner truly believed she was not guilty r-ights to which she was Petitioner was advised of her right to counsel provided by Petitioner, properly and Petitioner received all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03297-01
In addition, We recommend that the requested relief be denied. 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. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04849-01
On 19 December 1997, 3. received NJP for unauthorized absence a&d disobedience of a lawful order- in violation of Articles 86 and 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice Petitioner, then a corporal, grade E-4, of $598.00 pay per month for 2 months. appeal was denied on 8 January 1998. was awarded reduction in grade to E-3 and The forfeiture was Petitioner's (UCMJ), respectively. Petitioner's appeal was denied on 8 (PT) by lawful written order and the Petitioner was assigned to 4.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00841-02
Specifically, Petitioner told the investigating officer, “I am uncertain to which people were in my car, but I think it was LCpl, Cpl and a girl named To my knowledge, no one in my car exposed themselves to anyone at anytime.” c. On 2 March 2001, charges were preferred against Petitioner alleging dereliction of duty1, false official statement, disorderly conduct, and an indecent act, in violation of Articles 92(3), 107, and 134 of the. Subj: BOARD FOR CORRECTION O~ NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08394-01
Petitioner c>aims his punishment was unjust 4. because he was never ordered not to buy a vehicle; even if he was given such an order, did not buy the car, rather he leased it; and finally, even if he was in the wrong, Petitioner believes his offense did not warrant reduction to LCpl and removal from MSG battalion. 3 Subj: BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS IN THE CASE 0 (BCNR) APPLICATION synopsis of the restrictions governing buying or renting vehicles while attached by Company...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05781-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. (LCpl), forfeiture of Analysis He was awarded a a. Petitioner now asserts that his NJP was unjust because there was insufficient evidence to support the charge; because the legal advice he received was not in his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03280-00
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. Petitioner submits is a letter from Petitioner's regimental sergeant major, Sergeant Major Contrary to Petitioner's assert "yet another dimension" to the While Sergeant Major -elates first hand knowledge of Petitioner's first NJP and the subsequent investigation of that NJP, this information cas:. w expresses...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08387-01
Petitioner denied that the applicant Petitioner was offered, and he accepted, NJP. Analysis a. Petitioner claims that his NJP was unjust because he believes the preliminary inquiry into his misconduct contained "inconsistencies" a statement Petitioner made at the NJP. The record of the NJP reveals that the NJP was just.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03660-02
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. On 11 November 1998, Petitioner made an official written statement to the officer assigned to conduct an investigation into the accident for the purpose of making a line of duty / misconduct determination. Petitioner's NJP or the conduct of his BOI.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06299-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 March 2002. On April 26, 2001, Petitioner was wearing an organizational uniform incorrectly (i.e. blue coveralls with white socks) and was directed by a sergeant, a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO), to put on green or black socks. The basis of relief was that the noncommissioned officers "abandoned their rank" prior to providing instruction and directing...