DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No. 1857-19  
Ref: Signature Date  

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records  
To:   Secretary of the Navy  

Ref:  (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 
      (b) Manual for Courts-Martial (2012 ed.) 

Encl:   (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments 
        (2) Petitioner’s UPB entry of  25 Apr 16 
        (3) Administrative Remarks (Page 11) counseling entries of 25 Apr 16 
        (4) HQMC memo 1070 JPL of 9 Sep 19 

1.  Pursuant to reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that his record be corrected by removing his 25 April 2013 non-judicial punishment (NJP). 

2.  The Board reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 21 January 2020 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, relevant portions of Petitioner’s 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, found as follows: 

a.  Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulation within the Department of the Navy. 

b. On 2 April 2013, Petitioner received NJP for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation) and Article Art 134 (general article).  Petitioner received a forfeiture of $852.00 for two months (suspended for 6 months) and 60 days’ restriction.  He was also issued enclosure (3), an Administrative Remarks (Page 11) with two counseling entries.  The first entry counseled him for knowingly violating the U.S. Pacific Command Liberty Pass policy for the Philippines, and the second for his promotion restriction resulting from his NJP.  

c.  Petitioner contends that the NJP was imposed due to pressure from higher headquarters to resolve the situation quickly to eliminate public pressure on social media.  He asserts that his purportedly unduly harsh punishment was not warranted because the incident was only a minor altercation between two men that did not result in any legal proceedings, injuries, or military action with the partner nation.  Petitioner furnished an advocacy letter from the commanding officer who imposed the NJP, who recommends that the NJP be removed from Petitioner’s official military personnel file (OMPF) due to unlawful command influence.  

d.  The advisory opinion (AO), enclosure (4), recommended that Petitioner’s request be approved, noting that Petitioner alleges that he was subjected to NJP as a result of unlawful command influence from higher headquarters.  Moreover, the battalion commander who imposed NJP admits that he was unlawfully pressured by his superiors to impose NJP quickly and to find Petitioner guilty to assuage public concern. The AO also noted that reference (b) provides that “No superior may direct that a subordinate authority impose NJP in a particular case, issue regulations, orders, or ‘guides’ which suggest to subordinate authorities” that cases should be handled via NJP, court-martial, or other administrative means. 

CONCLUSION 

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s request warrants relief.  In this regard, the Board substantially concurred with the AO and determined that Petitioner’s NJP was imposed as a result of unlawful command influence in violation of reference (b).  Therefore, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s 25 April 2016 NJP and Page 11 entries shall be removed from his OMPF. 

RECOMMENDATION 

In view of the above, the Board recommends the following corrective action. 

Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing enclosure (2), his 25 April 2016 UPB documenting his NJP. 

Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing enclosure (3), his 25 April 2016 Page 11 consisting of two counseling entries. 

Petitioner’s record be audited to ensure that all rights, privileges, and property affected by the 25 April 2016 NJP are restored. 

The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) complete an audit of Petitioner’s records and make payment of any money that Petitioner may be entitled to. 

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.  This includes, but is not limited to, all information systems or database entries that reference or discuss the expunged material. 

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. 

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. 

Sincerely,