DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX ,
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100 .
TUR
Docket No: 8054-08
5 June 2009
aw t
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Te: Secretary of the Navy
Subj: REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF ¥jiy
Ref: {a} 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: {1) DD Form 149 with attachments
{2) Case Summary
. (3) Subject's naval record
‘1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1)
with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by
removing the nonjudicial punishment (NUP) of 21 November 2007,
all material referencing charges, and the punishment imposed.
[he Board, consisting of Mr33iyyiae . me and Mr.
7 Py eviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 3 June 2009 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that
the partial 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: “S
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b. Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.
ec. Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 December
2005 at age 19. Documentation in the record reflects that on 21
November 2007 he received NUP for wrongful possession of
marijuana. The punishment imposed was a $1,300 forfeiture of
pay, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, and reduction to
paygrade E-2. The forfeitures, restriction, and extra duty were
suspended for six months.
d. As a result of Petitioner’s illegal drug involvement, the
record also reflects three page 11 counselling (administrative
remarks) entries dated 19 February 2008. Subsequently,
Petitioner was administratively processed for separation by
reason of misconduct. In this regard, the discharge authority
directed discharge under other than honorable conditions. On 31
July 2008 he was so discharged and assigned an RE-4B reenlistment
code.
e. In the enclosed advisory opinion dated 3 March 2009,
Headquarters Marine Corps, Military Law Branch (JAM3),
recommended that Petitioner’s request for removal of the NUP be
denied because it was properly and lawfully imposed, and because
he was aware of his appeal rights and the right to make a
rebuttal to the NUP, but opted not to do either.
£. In the enclosed advisory opinion dated 1 April 2009, the
Headquarters Marine Corps Manpower Information, Manpower
Management Information System Division (MIO) recommended that
Petitioner’s request for removal of the counselling entries be
partially granted. In this regard, MIO stated that the first and
third counselling entries do not meet the elements required for a
proper counselling entry, and therefore should be removed from
the record. However, MIO stated that the second entry does meet
all of the required elements of a proper counselling entry and
should remain in the record. ,
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants partial
favorable action. In this regard, the Board substantially
concurs with the comments contained in the advisory opinions
provided by Headquarters Marine Corps codes MIO and JAM3.
Accordingly, only the first and third page 11 counselling entries
should be removed from Petitioner's record. The Board, also in
concurrence with the advisory opinions, concludes that the NUP
was properly imposed and should not be removed from the record.
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an
injustice warranting the following partial corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by. removing
the first and third page 11 administrative remarks entries, both
dated 19 February 2008, from the record.
b. That no further relief be granted.
ec. That any and all materials 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 materials be added to the record in the future.
d. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's
naval record be returned to the Board, together with a copy of
this Report of Proceedings, for retention in a confidential file
maintained for such purpose, with no cross-reference being made a
part of Petitioner'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 BRIAN —y GEORGE
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 Regulation, 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.
LW Noes
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09259-10
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former officer of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in part, that his record be corrected by removing the nonjudicial punishment (NIP) imposed on 3 September 2009. f. In an AO from MIO dated 21 October 2010, it was recommended that since Petitioner had committed the offenses of failure to obey a lawful order and drunken driving, his record, specifically, the administrative remarks (counselling)...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09788-09
In enclosure (3), MMOA-4, the HOMC Officer Counseling and Evaluation Section, commented to the effect that Petitioner's failures of selection to lieutenant colonel should not be removed, notwithstanding the PERB action, in view of the noncompetitive cumulative relative values in his fitness reports as a major, as well as a fitness report date gap. Notwithstanding enclosure (3), the Board finds Petitioner’s failures of selection to lieutenant colonel should be removed as well. b, That his...
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 | CY2009 | 02283-09
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure {1}, with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by removing the weight control entry for 24 January 2007 to 00000000; changing the “Proficiency” /"Conduct” marks for 31 July 2007, 31 January 2008 and 31 July 2008; and removing the lined through undated service record page 11 (“Administrative Remarks (1070)")} entry and the page 11...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12146-09
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing the nonjudicial punishment (NJP) he received on 4 August 2008 and all references thereof, which includes the letter of reprimand (LOR), unit punishment book (UPB) entries, and administrative remarks (page 11) entries. This entry noted counselling regarding Petitioner’s violations of the Uniformed Code...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03433-08
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by changing his primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) to 0351 (infantry assaultman) ; removing the adverse fitness report for 15 September 2002 to 13 March 2003, a copy of which is at Tab A (enclosure (2) shows the Headquarters Marine Corps {(HOMC) Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB} has...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04433-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2009. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions from the Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) Manpower Information Operations, Manpower Management Information Systems Division (MIO), dated 16 April 2008 with enclosure, and the HQMC Military Law Branch, Judge Advocate Division (JAM3), dated 28 April 2008, and the report of the HQMC Performance...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03051-08
__> DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMS Docket No: 3051-08 2 October 2008 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02803-07
He further requested removal of the fitness report for 20 November 1998 to 31 March 1999 (copy at Tab C in enclosure (1)). d. In enclosure (3), Petitioner added his request to remove the page 11 entry dated 24 March 1999. e. In enclosure (4), the HQMC PERB commented to the effect that the contested fitness report should stand. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the service record page 11d (“Administrative Remarks (1070) 7”) entry dated 24 March 1999.
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...