DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
Docket No: 4007-03
20 August 2003
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To :
Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF
Ref:
(a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) HQMC Memo 1070 JAM6 of 29 Jul 2003
(2) subject ' s naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an
enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed an application with
this Board requesting that his record be corrected by removing
the nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 7 January 2002 from his
record.
2. The Board, consisting of M r
Mr. -and
.
1
)
Ms.
reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and
injustice on 6 August 2003 and, pursuant to its regulations,
' determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
\,taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as
follows :
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Dieparbent of the Navy.
b. Petitioner's application was filed in a timely manner.
c. Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 October
2000 at age 22. On 7 January 2002 he received NJP for
disobedience of an order to stand watch as corporal of the guard.
The punishment imposed was forfeiture of pay of $373.00.
d. At enciosure (1) is an advisory opinion from the Head,
Military Law Branch, Headquarters Marine Corps. The advisory
opinion sets forth the facts of the case and states, in part, as
follows :
.... Petitioner claims that his NJP was unjust
since he had orders from his battalion commanding
officer authorizing him to be in Port.smouth, Virginia,
at the time he was to stand duty.
a. Based on the available documentation1,
Petitioner's NJP was erroneous. Although Petitioner
was given a verbal order to stand duty at 0200 on 26
December 2001 by his company first sergeant, Petitioner
had been authorized by his battalion commander to
depart his unit at 0800 on 25 December 2001, and to
return no later than 0700 on 27 December 2001. The
first sergeant had no authority to contradict the order
of the battalion commanded and his order was therefore
unlawful.
b. Petitioner's record should be corrected by
removing all entries reflecting his 7 January 2002 NJP.
We advise that Petitioner should also receive all pay
that was forfeited as a result of the NJP.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable
action. Given the circumstances, the Board agrees with the
comments contained in the advisory opinion. Therefore, the
record should be corrected wherever necessary to remove all
evidence of the NJP of 7 January 2002. This should include but
not necessarily be limited to the removal of any related
evaluation marks in proficiency or conduct
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing the
entry showing that he received NJP on 7 January 2002 from the
Offenses and Punishments Page (page 12), and by removing any
related evaluation marks in proficiency and conduct.
b. That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating to
the Board's recommendation be corrected, removed or completely
expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such entries or
material be added to the record in the future.
c. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's
naval record be returned to the Board, together with this Report
of Proceedings, for retention in a confidential file maintained
for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of
The command was contacted and was unable to locate the Unit
Punishment Book or any of the NJP documents. Also, Petitioner's
company 1st Sgt at that time ... was contacted and was unable to
provide any additional material.
Eetitioner's naval record.
4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's
review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
Acting Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of
Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e))
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby
announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the
authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02415-09
application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 1i(b) (“Administrative Remarks (1070)"} entry dated i? ‘CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board substantially concurs with enclosure (2) in finding the existence of an error and injustice warranting partial relief, specifically, removal of the page 11(d) entry dated 8 March 2002, with the rebuttal dated 12 March 2002, as...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03368-02
Pursuant to reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the fitness reports for 7 August 2000 to 7 April 2001 and 1 August to 13 September 2001, copies of which are in enclosure (1) at Tabs A and B, respectively. ’s request for an SSB, states that the h. In enclosure (5), the HQMC Officer Counseling and Evaluation Section, Personnel Management Division (MMOA-4), has...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01607-07
On April 15, 2005, Petitioner, through counsel, submitted an application to the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) seeking removal of the January 1, 2001 to July 7,2Docket No. 01607-072001 fitness report, removal of naval records pertaining to the NJP and a remedial promotion board See enclosure (4)g. Petitioner’s request was bifurcated. Here, Petitioner did not take any action to have his fitness report removed until 15 April 2005, well after the dates of the Selection Boards...
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 | 00651-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a member of the Marine Corps, applied to this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the 7 April 1993 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and the Administrative Remarks (page 11) entries of 19 April 1993 and 23 October 1996. The opinion recommends removal of the entries documenting the NJP of 7 April 1993, based on the CO's action of 8 January 2000. In summary, the minority believes that the NJP and the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08054-01
In his application, Petitioner contends that it was unfair to impose NJP for the four day period of UA because bailed myself out and would have if I knew I was going to be charged..." He points out the statement of the SSGT to the effect that he would be placed on leave and states that this individual was unavailable during the NJP process. together with a copy of Caron cannot go along with the recommendation of the majority d. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10555-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner applied to this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by setting-aside the nonjudicial punishment (NJP) imposed on him on 4 December 2002, and removing the record of the NJP and all documents related thereto from his naval record. e. On 4 December 2002, while serving as a staff sergeant, Petitioner received NJP for violating a lawful written order, by contacting KH by e-mail on or about 21 November 2002 [sic] in violation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05921-08
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a member of the United States Marine Corps, filed an application with this Board requesting that an entry showing that he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 19 January 2002 be removed from the Marine Corps Total Force System (MCTFS). ceviewed Petitioner's allegation error and injustice on 5 August 2008 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05291-08
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a member of the United States Marine Corps, filed an application with this Board requesting that an entry showing that he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 19 January 2002 be removed from the Marine Corps Total Force System (MCTFS). ceviewed Petitioner's allegation error and injustice on 5 August 2008 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09239-02
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps applied to this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing a nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and changing his reenlistment code. In that (Petitioner) . Turning to the NJP, the Board agrees with the conclusion of JAM that it should be removed from Petitioner’s records since the record does not reflect that his enlistment was extended “with a view to trial.” In this regard,...