DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
W A S H I N G T O N DC 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
CRS
Docket No: 6290-02
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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 7 May 2003. 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
with a$l rqqterial sMb~ittgSi in fvppert
qg,pl&atian, tcg$&her
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 14 February
2003, a copy of which is attached. The Board also considered
your rebuttal statement of 19 March 2003.
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. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
The Board also considered your
Medal but could not find any evidence that such an award was
recommended or approved. Additionally, the Board does not
reimburse individuals for the loss of military equipment.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Lox the Navy Achievement
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 a n official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIF
Executive Dir
Enclosure
I
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
2 NAW m E X
WASHINGTON. DC 2-1775
I
IN REPLY REFER TO:
1070
JAM4
FEB 1 4 2003
MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL
RECORDS
Subj: BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNK) APPLICATION
IN THE CASE OF FOR ME^
USMC
1. We are asked to provide an opinion on Petitioner's request
for reinstatement to the grade of sergeant, paygrade E-5.
Petitioner was reduced in grade as a result of thc~ non-judicial
punishment (NJP) he received on 1 September 2001.
2. We recommend that the requested relief be denj
analysis follows.
ed. Our
3 . Background
a. On 3 0 August 2001, the Commanding Officer, Battalion
Landing Team 2/1, 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, Camp
Pendleton, California, imposed NJP on Petitioner for larceny of
two switchblades from a Navy petty officer, in violation of
Article 121 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Petitioner
was reduced to the grade of corporal (paygrade E-4), restricted
to specified limits for 45 days, and awarded forfeiture of
$ 7 5 0 . 0 0 pay per month for 2 months.
b. Petitioner appealed the NJP in his letter of 2 September
2001. In the letter, Petitioner took "full responsibility" and
admitted he was wrong to take the switchblades from the petty
officer. As a result of Petitioner's appeal, the Commanding
Officer, Battalion Landing Team 2/1, suspended the forfeitures.'
c. On 4 December 2001, the Commanding Officer Battalion
Landinq Team 2/1, vacated the suspension and order-theimnosed
forfeitures executed. This action was taken following
additional minor offenses against the UCMJ committed by
Petitioner.
4. Analysis. Petitioner claims that his NJP was unjust because
he did not commit misconduct and was not given adequate
opportunity to explain his version of events. Petitioner's
claims are without merit.
Subj: BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL
a. Petitioner has provided no evidence that nls NJP was
unjust or that he was otherwise treated unfairly. The record
does not reveal any legal error or deprivation of administrative
rights associated with NJP - and no specific error is alleged.
b. Petitioner now claims that he did not commit misconduct
because he did not intend to steal the switchblades.
Petitioner's attempt to re-litigate the facts surrounding his
offense is both untimely and contrary to his earlier express
admissions. Petitioner offers a self-serving explanation of his
subjective intent that does not correspond to his actions at the
time of his offense, or those during the course of his
punishment. To take Petitioner at his word now, without any
supporting evidence, is to surrender this process to the
irrational.
c. Petitioner provides no evidence to support his vague
claim that he was denied adequate opportunity to explain his
version of events. The record demm&rates the falsity of this
claim in any event. Petitioner appealed his NJP ;n writing, and
certainly could have authored an exposition of hi3 innocence.
Instead, Petitioner admitted wrongdoing.
5. Conclusion. Accordingly, for the reason notea, we recommend
that the requested relief be denied.
Military Law Branch
Judge Advocate Division
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05978-03
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 19 August 2003, a copy of which is attached. The BOI also substantiated misconduct or moral or professional dereliction as evidenced by the commission of military or civilian offenses, which, if prosecuted under the UCMJ, could be punished by six months or more, or would require proof of specific intent for conviction. The BOI recommended Petitioner's retention.
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 | CY2002 | 01543-02
Alternatively, Petitioner requests removal of the record as an act of clemency. If he made such representations, Major state directly. Subj: BOARD FOR ICO MAJOR ) APPLICATION 5.
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 | CY2002 | 07787-01
On 25 February 2000, Petitioner, a sergeant, pay grade The Petitioner responded by saying "that the conversation was originally lieutenarnr colonel and if the captain was During the the Petitioner was told by one of the captains, in of E-S, was discussing an issue with a lieutenant colonel. The following Monday, Petitioner was directed by the Petitioner was advised of his Article 31 rights; executive officer to provide a statement, and he did. words, Pet for Captai request of a Petitioner...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04265-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2003. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 04025-98
who On 06 January 1992, petitioner's Commanding Officer (CO) bythe CO included assault under UCMJ, Article 128, took petitioner to nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for his involvement in the 02-03 December 1992 altercation. Even if the defense does apply to drur& and disorderly conduct, an examination of the punitive reprimand issued by the CO as punishment at the NJP shows that the CO found petitioner guilty at the hearing not because of the alleged assault, but a supervisory senior...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08327-01
Petitioner's SCM record. SCMs;' therefore, the convening 25, UCMJ, criteria apply to authority essentially must "know" the officer who will serve as SCM. Petitioner accepted SCM and made no (l), Summary Court-Martial Officer's Petitioner had two opportunities to object and Petitioner cannot now claim that his SCM was However, he accepted SCM as part of the PTA knowing the convening authority could refer his Additionally, Petitioner t o did not oblect to if he had d. Witness' desire...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04848-98
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Headquarters, Marine Corps, copies of which are attached. d. It is also important to note that Petitioner's battalion commander, not his company commander or company gunnery sergeant, referred his charge to a special court-martial and approved the sentence. We conclude that Petitioner's special court-martial did not result in an error or injustice and should not be removed from his record.
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)...