DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 6050-12
18 July 2012
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10
States Code, Section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 July 2012. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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.
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.
The Board found that in November and December 2011 you were
convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of two specifications of
failure to obey a lawful order by engaging in two personal unduly
familiar relationships with no respect to the differences in
paygrade or rank, two specifications of making false official
Statements with the intent to deceive by saying that a lance
corporal had never been to your house and claiming that you were
only a professional mentor to a lance corporal, and obstructing
justice by wrongfully endeavoring to impede an investigation by
sending a text message to a lance corporal telling her not to
discuss you during her interview. You were sentenced to a
reduction to paygrade E-5, restriction for 60 days, and hard
labor for 90 days. As a result of the GCM, you were also
counselled (issued a page 11 warning) and received an adverse
fitness report.
The Board has no authority to consider contentions pertaining to
improprieties in courts-martial and must limit its review to
determining whether the sentence should be modified as a matter
of clemency. With that being said, the Board concluded that your
commanding officer’s decision to convene a GCM and the sentence
thereto, was appropriate, and that it was administratively and
procedurally correct as written and filed.
Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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 PFE
Executive Di or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08600-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2007. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Nevertheless, on 17 November 1969 you received your sixth NUP for failure to obey a lawful order and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days. The record further reflects that on 1...
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 | CY2005 | 02859-05
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. You were discharged on 20 December 1984 with an other than honorable discharge. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 10599 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 March 2013. 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 03951-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2002. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and In addition, the Board considered the advisory applicable statutes, regulations and policies. request contains two prior service with the same date phonecon with Per a time of was discharged...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01548 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2012. 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. On 25 February 1970 you submitted a written request for clemency, specifically, a reduction in confinement, mitigation of the DD, and the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04056-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your - application on 12 January 2012. The Board, in its. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03872-02
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 11 July 2002, a copy of which is attached. application with supporting 118(11) MC0 (IRAM), authorizes commanders to make P1070.12K, Marine Corps Individual Records 2. s claim that the page 11 unjust because the contents of counseling, did occur The event, d. Lance Corpora page 11 entry in her provide any other supporting documented evidence to support her request for removal of the page 11 entry.