Awards

JAG Outreach: College 

Campus and Courtrooms

Navy SJAs in 

Combatant

Commands

Transformation

in Europe, Asia

Navyudge dvocate eneral’s Corps

March/April 2007

Sharing Judges

IA Update: Task 

Force 134
On the cover

INSIDE 

JAG MAGAZINE

IA Reports: Task Force 134

Page 4

Legalman Discusses Single Parenthood, Life as IA

Page 6 

TJAG Visits Baghdad Legal Team

Page 7 

Strategic Action, Transformation in EURSWA

Page 8 

Navy Takes Lead SJA Positions in COCOMs

Page 11 

Marine Corps Judge Handles High-Profile Army Case

Page 12 

Members of OJAG Brief Marshall Center Students

Page 14 

Villanova School of Law Welcomes Navy JAGs

Page 14 

Court Takes Oral Arguments to GW Law School

Page 15 

Regular columns

NSPS................................................................Page 16

JAG Corps 2020...............................................Page 17

JAG Awards......................................................Page 18

Photos from the Fleet.......................................Page 20

The U.S Navy-Marine 

Corps Court of Criminal 

Appeals heard arguments 

in the case of United States 

vs. Gallagher on Jan. 25 at 

George Washington University Law School. See 

more on Page 15.
BRUCE MacDONALD

Rear Admiral, JAGC, U.S. Navy

Judge Advocate General

It has been a busy time since 

publication of the last JAG Magazine. We released hard copies of 

JAG Corps 2020 and each of you 

should have your own copy by 

now. We also sent copies of the 

JAG Magazine to retired members of the JAG Corps community. 

Thank you to all who responded 

with words of appreciation. It is 

my goal to always have an open 

dialog with our entire community 

-- civilians, officers and enlisted, 

reserve and active duty, our retirees and family members. 

In this edition of the JAG Magazine, we focus on the JAG Corps’ 

role in current operations. Captain 

Nan DeRenzi, Captain Del Crandall and Captain Corky Malcom, 

were all recently selected for 

Combatant Command Staff Judge 

Advocate positions, which demonstrates the high caliber of people 

we have in our community. 

We also start a series of firsthand accounts from JAG Corps 

Individual Augmentees (IA) with 

two stories from Task Force 134. 

This series will continue throughout the year with stories from IAs 

serving all over the world. We 

all have a duty to take care of the 

families our JAG Corps IAs leave 

behind. LN2 Debra Bazan writes 

about her daily life at TF 134 and 

describes how the JAG community 

came together to support her and 

her family after her home suffered 

a devastating fire while she was 

deployed to Iraq. 

LN2 Veronica Ibarguen writes about 

what it was like to 

be a single parent 

and IA. 

 Regarding JAG 

Corps 2020 and the 

JAG transformation effort, Captain 

Mark Lawton and 

Commander Steven 

Haycock explain the 

defense command 

pilot program being 

tested in Europe 

and Southwest Asia. 

Their assessment of 

how well the project has gone to date 

has lead us to start 

planning for a similar pilot project in 

the continental United States at the 

end of this year. 

Another transformation effort is 

the recent interservice memorandum of agreement (MOA) to share 

military judges. The Army used 

this MOA to detail Marine Corps 

Lieutenant Colonel Paul McConnell to one of the Army Abu Ghraib 

courts-martial. The article describing his experience is a fascinating 

look into our joint future. 

Excellent examples of Navy JAG 

Corps outreach are reflected in 

this month’s articles. I encourage 

everyone to look for opportunities 

to share what you do for the United 

States Navy and our Sailors.

I am interested in your feedback 

regarding the JAG Magazine and/or 

any of the articles here in. Please 

contribute by forwarding ideas 

about potential stories or even volunteering to write about something 

you are doing. 

Thank you for all you do each 

day. 

The Judge Advocate General
4

JAG Corps Reports: 

Individual Augmentee for Task Force 134

Editors note: The Chief of Naval 

Operations has made it clear that individual augmentees (IAs) are critical to 

the Navy’s effort in the war on terrorism. 

In a recent visit to Camp McCrady, S.C. 

to see the training of IAs, he said, “I’m 

anxious to pitch in as much as we possibly can for the duration of this war. 

Not only can we do our share, but [we 

can] take as much stress off those who 

are deploying back-to-back, home one 

year, deployed one year and now are on 

their third or fourth deployment.” This 

article begins a JAG Magazine series 

of first-hand accounts from members of 

the JAG Corps in individual augmentee 

assignments. 

Lt. Chris Jeter, JAGC, USN

Task Force 134

I start my day before the Baghdad 

sunrise. At 5:30 a.m., my roommate 

and I navigate the maze of T-barriers 

and CONEX boxes to the make-shift 

dusty gym. Back in our dormitorystyle barracks, we grab a quick shower 

and glance at Armed Forces Network 

television as we dress for work. I normally get to the office by 8:00 a.m. in 

order to prep for the daily 8:30 a.m. 

meeting, which charts the course for 

the long day ahead. My workday normally lasts between 12-16 hours. This 

is my routine seven days a week at Task 

Force 134 – Legal, in Baghdad, Iraq.

I work in the Magistrate Cell. 

Instead of khakis and garrison covers, 

we arrive each day wearing desert 

cammies and 9mm pistols. This unassuming office, comprised of a doublewide trailer, is the “tip of the spear” 

for the legal process set up to ensure 

detainees receive due process under a 

myriad of international laws and U.N. 

Security Council Resolutions. Located 

next to the Theater Internment Facility 

(TIF), I am struck daily by the sight 

of concertina wire, armed guards and 

detainees. 

We spend our days pouring over sixpart files filled with detainee information, witness statements and classified 

intelligence reports. The Magistrate 

Cell acts as the first independent legal 

review of a completed detainee packet. 

As an O-3, I apply the relevant legal 

standard, assess risk and identify the 

appropriate forum for adjudication.

The system employed by MultiNational Force Iraq includes multiple levels of review to ensure each 

detainee receives due process. The 

initial review following apprehension 

is completed by the detaining unit and 

is called a Detention Review Authority. The second review occurs at the 

TF 134 Magistrate Cell. Based on 

this review, the Magistrate Cell either 

recommends the detainee be expeditiously released or retained as an 

imperative security threat. 

Based on the information provided 

by the Detaining Unit, the Magistrate 

Cell is also tasked with recommending 

whether a detainee should be referred 

to the Central 

Criminal Court of 

Iraq (CCCI) for 

criminal prosecution. Individuals 

not referred to 

the CCCI and 

detained solely as 

a security internee 

have their cases 

reviewed by the 

Combined Review 

and Release Board 

(CRRB) at least 

twice a year. Comprised of Government of Iraq (GOI) and MNF-I 

representatives, the CRRB is consistent 

with Article 78 of Geneva Convention 

IV. The CCCI or CRRB, depending 

on which forum the detainee is presented to, forms the third review in 

this system. 

I make trips to the TIF to positively 

identify a detainee, view detainee 

property or complete any number of 

tasks. I feel far from home when I 

encounter the smell of the detention 

facility’s concrete walls and hear the 

commands of U.S. soldiers translated 

into Arabic, echoing throughout the 

halls.

The aura of war is ever-present. 

Whether hearing the news of another 

U.S. casualty or passing the armed 

guards at the dining facility, my circumstances are unforgettable. When 

it’s time to travel, we load into uparmored Humvees, talk over the rattling sounds of metal and proceed 

along ill-defined roads surrounded by 

fences and guard towers. My heart 

skips a beat when random mortar and 

rocket attacks hit nearby. It is common 

for the day’s work to be interrupted by 

the sounds of sirens, explosions and 

outgoing artillery rounds. We 

then don 40 lbs of 

body armor, trade 

our soft cover for 

a Kevlar helmet 

and plunge into 

the dust that leads 

home. After three 

months, I have 

finally learned to 

sleep through the 

sounds of helicopters, gunfire and 

loud speakers. 

This is truly a 

“This unassuming 

office... comprised of 

a double-wide trailer, 

is the ‘tip of the spear’ 

for the legal process set up to ensure 

detainees receive due 

process.”

-- Lt. Chris Jeter, 

TF 134
5

joint, combined, and coalition environment. Each day is a fusion of service 

cultures and traditions. Daily rides 

to the chow hall include Romanians, 

Australians and other foreign nationals. 

The best part of my job is easy to 

identify. I most enjoy the opportunity 

to meet and interact with the young 

heroes who conduct daily combat missions. Their courage and professionalism is inspiring. I am proud to be a 

Navy JAG in Iraq – doing my part.

LN2 Debra M. Bazan, USN

Task Force 134

I arrived at Camp Cropper at the end 

of November 2006 not knowing what to 

expect. All I knew is that I was assigned 

to TF 134, Detainee Operations, working in the Magistrate Cell. When I volunteered for this assignment, I knew that 

it would change my outlook on life, and 

I wanted it to. I have come to realize that 

being here is more than just an event that 

changes your outlook — it requires so 

much more. It requires a change in your 

frame of mind. My day-to-day activities can seem quite repetitive, but it is 

the different people and encounters that 

make a difference — that can change a 

bad day into a good one, that can make a 

long day seem short, and that can make 

something small and insignificant seem 

important. Every day can seem like just 

another day, but it is another day that 

adds to what makes me the person I am.

I expected to have to sacrifice the luxuries that we are accustomed to, and even 

with all the changes you will not find me 

complaining. I went from working seven 

to eight hours a day, five days a week, 

to working 12 to 14 hour days, six and a 

half days a week; from being able to walk 

alone, to always having to have a battle 

buddy; from carrying a cute purse to carrying an M16; from going to the gym in 

running shoes to going in combat boots; 

from wearing a polyester cover to wearing a five pound Kevlar helmet. 

The everyday life here in Baghdad, 

Iraq has become a reality check to me. It 

has made me appreciate my family, my 

co-workers and myself so much more. I 

have come to the realization that I can do 

more than I have in the past, and that I am 

capable of pushing past those limits.

Every morning on my way to the Magistrate Cell, I take in the view of the new 

arrivals to the Theater Internment Facility, 

trudge through the mud, and try to avoid 

the wind-blown smells from the truck that 

cleans the ‘port-a-johns.’ By 8:30 a.m. 

I am walking into our trailer, which is 

where I spend a majority of my time. 

The night shift attorneys are getting 

ready to head out and the day shift is 

settling in. We say our good mornings, 

try to make a decent cup of coffee, and 

IA continued on page 6

Lt. Chris Jeter and LN2 Debra Bazan, assigned to Task Force 134 describe 

life as a JAG Corps Individual Augmentee
6

have our morning meeting. Being 

here has brought people from different 

parts of the world and every branch of 

the military to work together. 

The system employed by MultiNational Force Iraq includes multiple levels of review to ensure each 

detainee receives due process. The initial review is completed by the detaining unit. The second review occurs at 

the TF 134 Magistrate Cell. Based on 

this review, the Magistrate Cell either 

recommends the detainee be released 

or retained as a security threat. 

Our work is important but having a 

supportive command, understanding 

family, and a good group of people to 

work with is what makes the difference 

out here. We have laughed together, 

struggled together, shared our holidays, and even shared some tears. I 

recently had a devastating house fire, 

and it amazed me how much my command, family, friends, Legalmen, and 

the JAG community came together and 

offered their support. I just wanted to 

push it all aside and deal with it when 

I returned home, but after talking with 

my officer-in-charge I realized that 

probably wasn’t the best decision and 

that everyone was standing by with 

open hearts, ready to share my burden 

and help me through it. 

At the end of every night, I walk 

home with my battle buddy, mark off 

another day on my calendar, get in a 

good workout at the gym, shower, take 

in the view of the pictures I have of 

my family next to my bed, and then 

say my prayers. I do all this with the 

distant sound of gun fire, helicopters 

taking off and landing, and the shaking of controlled detonations. All in 

all, I have come to appreciate, accept, 

and understand that with the closing 

of another day that I have done something to make my family, friends, coworkers and me proud.

Being a single parent in the military has always been challenging, but 

when duty calls you must sometimes leave your family behind. When I 

was told that I was going on an IA to Honduras for six months shortly after 

giving birth to my daughter, it was unexpected. Leaving my four-monthold was the hardest thing I ever had to do. I made arrangements to take my 

daughter to Texas, where my mother was going to take care of her for the 

duration of my IA. I had to pack, put all my household goods in storage 

and deal with numerous other issues along the way. The support I received 

from my family and my command made my preparations easier and helped 

with the stress. 

After leaving my daughter with my mother and taking care of everything 

else, I attended a week’s training at the CONUS Replacement Center in Ft. 

Benning, GA. When I arrived at Joint Task Force-Bravo, Honduras, it was 

quite obvious that this was very different from any of my previous commands. This was my first time working at a joint command. JTF-Bravo 

consisted of Army, Air Force and Navy personnel. I worked at the Command Judge Advocate Office, and the attorney I worked for was an Army 

JAG. Some of the services we provided were legal assistance, claims, military justice, civil law and immigration. It was a little rough at the beginning, 

and I spent most of my days learning Army procedures, doing research, and 

calling paralegals from U.S. Southern Command whenever I had any questions or concerns. I was extremely fortunate in that everyone was really 

helpful in assisting me with any issues that arose. 

Along with working at the CJA office, I also volunteered every other 

weekend at the local orphanage. The conditions in which these children 

live were appalling. It made me realize two things: how lucky I am to 

have what I have and how we take our routine things for granted. We had 

fund raisers to buy school supplies, clothes, shoes and every day necessities, as well as some toys. To see the smiles on all the kids’ faces was 

so rewarding. Spending time with the children made me feel closer to 

my daughter, and made me feel good about myself. Knowing that we are 

making a difference in Honduras and around the world is something that 

we all can take pride in. 

My overall experience working at JTF-B was great. It was rewarding 

professionally and personally. I was given the opportunity to work with 

other services and the Honduran local nationals. As a service member and 

a family member, we all are faced with many challenges during our careers, 

and many require sacrifices. Whether a regular deployment, a TAD, or an 

IA, it’s all part of serving our country and providing a better life for our 

families.

Legalman Discusses 

Single Parenthood, Life 

as Individual Augmentee

By LN2 Veronica Ibarguen, Joint Task Force-Bravo, Honduras

IA

Continued from page 5
7

By MCCS (SW/AW) Jon McMillan

Navy News Stand

Navy JAG Visits Baghdad Military Legal Team

BAGHDAD – The Judge Advocate 

General of the Navy, Rear Adm. Bruce 

MacDonald, visited the military legal 

team deployed to Baghdad March 10 and 

11. He also met with operational commanders, observed two detainee trials at 

the Central Criminal Court of Iraq and 

observed the review of detainee cases at 

the joint Multi-National Forces and Iraqi 

Combined Review and Release Board.

More than 100 military attorneys and 

paralegals – mostly from the Navy and 

Air Force – are deployed as individual 

augmentees to Iraq supporting the MultiNational Force. Most of them work for 

Task Force 134, the task force charged 

with detainee command and control, 

ensuring due process and assisting Iraq 

rebuild its judicial, correctional and law 

enforcement system.

“This is incredibly important work for 

our attorneys and legalmen,” said MacDonald. “The Iraqi judicial system has 

to work. Trying to support and help Iraq 

rebuild their judicial system is so important because the Iraqi people need a viable 

police force and judicial system that will 

protect them.”

MacDonald said the mission places 

a high demand for attorneys and legalmen who are performing an integral role 

processing detainees housed at MultiNational Force Theater Internment Facilities in Iraq. 

“The more assets we assign – the more 

individual augmentees – the quicker Task 

Force 134 can process detainees,” said 

MacDonald. “We are protecting due process rights of detainees as we move them 

through the Iraqi system so the detainees 

who should be released are; and the one’s 

who shouldn’t be released are not.”

Judge Advocate General Corps officers on the ground in Iraq said it was 

important for MacDonald to visit and 

meet the team here and see their working 

and living conditions. “They’re happy to 

see the leadership come out and not only 

see what they do and where they do it, 

but the importance of what they do,” said 

Capt. Bruce MacKenzie, Task Force 134 

legal advisor.

MacDonald also conducted two Admiral’s Calls while in Baghdad and briefed 

the audiences on the status of Individual 

Augmentee requirements and how the 

community is managing current and 

future requirements. MacDonald told 

the audiences that the demand for JAGs 

and paralegals is growing across the services and he and his staff are working on 

innovative ways to meet the needs of the 

operational commanders and ensure the 

active, reserve and civilian components 

of the JAG Corps contribute their fair 

share.

“We have to develop a long-term 

holistic plan,” said MacDonald. “The 

next year here is critical to ensure we 

source these requirements.” 

According to MacDonald and his 

Senior Enlisted Leader, Master Chief 

Legalman (SW/AW) Steve Distefano, 

every Navy individual augmentee billet 

so far has been filled by volunteers. 

“When they get back they thank me for 

the opportunity to do this,” said Distefano. “They come back with a new 

sense of pride about what they do here 

as a Sailor and a legalman.”

During the two-day visit, MacDonald also reenlisted Legalman 2nd Class 

Mica Elizabeth Chinn and Legalman 

2nd Class Debra Bazan, both Magistrate 

Cell paralegals at Task Force 134, in a 

ceremony at Al Faw Palace at Camp 

Victory. 

“For him to come all the way from the 

states and reenlist us meant a lot,” said 

Chinn. “It shows he cares and we’re not 

just names or bodies to send to Iraq.”

MacDonald also visited JAG Corps 

officers and legalman in Bahrain and 

Afghanistan. 

Rear Adm. Bruce MacDonald reenlists Legalman 2nd Class Mica Chinn at 

Al Faw Palace located on Camp Victory.
8

Strategic Action, Transformation 

in Europe and Southwest Asia 

By Capt. Mark Lawton & 

Cmdr. Steven Haycock

EURSWA

The future for the Department 

of Defense, the Navy, and the 

Navy JAG Corps involves 

transformation. The unique challenges 

of the Global War on Terrorism, and 

the Navy and JAG Corps’ support 

in winning it, require flexibility. In 

Europe, the operational merger of the 

staffs of Commander, Naval Forces 

Europe (CNE); Commander, Sixth 

Fleet; and Commander, Submarine 

Group Eight; and the physical relocation 

of the staffs from London and Gaeta 

to Naples, was consistent with CNE’s 

call for an overall post-Cold War 

transformation of the Navy presence 

in Europe and Africa – “south and 

east.” The creation of a new combatant 

command – Africa Command – is 

another transformational element in the 

Europe and Southwest Asia (EURSWA) 

AORs. Coincidentally, the Sending 

State Office in Rome, as directed by the 

EUCOM staff, was undergoing its 

own transformation that resulted 

in greater responsibility for CNE 

and Commander, Navy Region 

Europe (CNRE) – and additional 

duties for CNE and CNRE legal. 

Consistent with these 

transformations, the JAG Corps 

instituted a new pilot project – or, 

rather, projects - to explore more 

efficient means to deliver legal 

services to both our command 

and individual clients. The 

EURSWA Pilot Projects serve 

as an excellent example of the 

JAG Corps’ responsiveness to 

Navy leadership and a testament 

to “lean” and “6 sigma” models for 

constant improvement in the areas of 

value, timeliness, and quality. When 

CNE announced his commitment 

to accelerating Navy Europe’s 

Transformation efforts while shifting 

“south and east,” Commander, Naval 

Legal Service Command (CNLSC) 

took advantage of this opportunity to 

innovate. The result was the ongoing 

EURSWA Pilot Projects.

Background

The JAG Corps’ recent innovations 

in EURSWA began in October 2004, 

with an agreement between CNRE and 

OJAG/CNLSC, that merged shorebased staff judge advocate, foreign 

criminal jurisdiction, and prosecution 

services in Iceland, UK, Italy, Spain, 

and Greece. One year later, an 

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) 

between Commander Navy Region 

Southwest Asia (CNRSWA), CNRE, 

and CNLSC extended, indefinitely, the 

pilot into SWA (Bahrain and Djibouti). 

As a result of these changes, the 

command went from a TSO with 25 

people in 4 locations to a RLSO with 

75 people in 8 locations. The RLSO 

CO, Capt. Mark Lawton, wears three 

hats: CO of the RLSO, SJA for CNRE, 

and SJA for CNRSWA. The RLSO 

EURSWA Pilot Project was linked to, 

and resulted in: initial elimination of 

certain judge advocate billets in Rota 

and Sigonella; planned closure of 

legal offices in Iceland, the UK, and 

LaMaddalena; and the elimination of 

the military judge billets in Naples to 

be replaced by a circuit judge “terms of 

court” concept with active and reserve 

judges coming forward to EURSWA 

during pre-planned times. 1

The EURSWA Pilot Projects also 

extend to the NLSO. After briefings in 

March 2006 in Naples to Rear Admiral 

MacDonald, the decision was made to 

shift the legal assistance and claims 

functions to the RLSO and for the 

NLSO to operate as a “defense-only” 

command for a trial period of one 

year. The specifics regarding the Pilot 

Projects are memorialized in a separate 

MOA signed by CNLSC, CNRE, and 

CNRSWA. 

The Pilot Project MOA 

expands the RLSO’s mission to 

include responsibility for Legal 

Assistance and Claims (including 

Foreign and SOFA claims from 

the Sending State Office in Rome) 

throughout EURSWA.2 It shifts 

all Legal Assistance and Claims 

military personnel3 and civilian 

billets4 from the NLSO to the 

RLSO. Because of the differences 

in size between the RLSO and the 

NLSO under the Pilot, the MOA 

gives the RLSO responsibility 

for the majority of joint collateral 

duties.

The MOA gives the NLSO a 

“We have seen the power 

and speed in which actions, 

images, and ideas impact 

military operations. This 

pace of change continually 

redefines the security 

environment in which we 

operate. Our Navy is on 

course and speed to match 

that pace”

-- CNO Guidance for 2007
9

“We are committed not only to continue the many transformation initiatives 

already underway in our community, but also to accelerate that transformation 

to ensure we always provide superb solutions regardless of the circumstances.” 

-- JAG Corps 2020 

focused, defense only, mission. Under 

the Pilot, the headquarters office in 

Naples is staffed with a Commanding 

Officer (Cmdr. Steve Haycock), a 

senior enlisted leader, a senior defense 

counsel, one additional defense counsel, 

and a first class legalman. The NLSO 

presence in Sigonella was scaled back 

from three judge advocates and three 

legalmen to one judge advocate and 

one legalman. The NLSO presence 

in Rota disappeared completely. Only 

the Branch Office in Bahrain, with one 

attorney and one legalman, remained 

unaffected. In total, nine people 

remain part of the new NLSO. This 

structure assumes that the requirement 

for defense services will diminish as 

CNE decreases the Navy’s population 

in Europe.5

Due to the outstanding relationship 

and spirit of cooperation between the two 

commands, the planning and execution 

of the Pilot Projects went quite 

smoothly. A joint command planning 

committee in Naples met regularly 

to anticipate and resolve issues. In 

Naples and Sigonella, the NLSO 

swapped offices with the RLSO. After 

the Pilot began, the NLSO personnel 

who performed legal assistance and 

claims functions continued the mission 

from the same office spaces as part 

of the RLSO, ensuring a seamless 

transition for clients. IT equipment 

moved with individuals. SJAs and 

trial counsel, assuming responsibility 

under the Pilot for Legal Assistance in 

remote locations and in conflict cases, 

received two days of training from 

experienced NLSO LA providers and 

have continued to receive regularly 

scheduled legal assistance training. 

The opportunities for enhanced 

professional development of judge 

advocates and legalmen attached to the 

RLSO are significant.

Measures of Success

The Pilot MOA set forth metrics 

in four areas: Quality of service, 

timeliness, efficiency, and corporate 

improvement. Quality of service is 

being measured with quantifiable 

customer satisfaction surveys administered to individuals for Legal 

Assistance and Defense services and 

to client commands for Command 

Services and prosecution. In addition, 

military judges are surveyed regarding 

counsel performance. Other qualityrelated issues to be measured include 

pre- and post-trial errors (to be captured 

by CMTIS), denials of requests for 

services, the nature and extent of JAG/

LN training, and the creation of new 

services.6 

Both commands are measuring 

timeliness of service by tracking 

customer wait times for appointments 

and/or services. CMTIS will measure 

certain processing times for courts and 

boards. The RLSO also tracks average 

processing times for NATO SOFA 

claims. 

Positive results in the efficiency 

metric are apparent from the fact that 

NLSC is meeting demand in Europe 

with fewer personnel overall. The 

NLSO was reduced by an O-6 (CO), 

two O-4s (OICs in Sigonella and 

Rota), three O-3s (Defense Counsels 

in Sigonella and Rota), and two 

legalmen. In 2005, the RLSO cut 

officer billets in Rota and Sigonella 

and is slotted for additional officer 

billet reductions in Naples, Sigonella, 

and Rota in 2007/2008. While military 

justice TAD costs have increased 

under the Pilot,7 as Defense Counsel 

must travel more often throughout the 

AOR to participate in courts-martial 

and administrative boards in areas 

without a NLSO presence, TAD costs 

are eclipsed by the savings realized by 

the NLSO’s diminished footprint.8 

Finally, the Pilot sets forth a metric 

for corporate improvement. The RLSO 

measures the number and the quality 

of command services and preventative 

law training conducted. The NLSO 

looks for ways to alert Sailors to the 

defense services available to them, 

even in locations without a NLSO 

presence.

Initial Impressions

Based on the results of individual 

client surveys, the RLSO believes it 

has maintained legal assistance quality 

throughout the AOR. In fact, because 

of increased emphasis and training, LA 

quality has been improved at remote 

locations such as Souda Bay and La 

Maddalena. Additionally, a larger 

command gives the RLSO greater 

flexibility and surge capability, allowing 

it to successfully support short-notice 

IAs and operational requirements (for 

example, recent mishap investigations 

in the Gulf and the English Channel). 

Finally, cross-training and intraoffice rotations between prosecution 

and legal assistance permit greater 

professional development for judge 

advocates and legalmen alike. 

Despite having fewer attorneys 

available than in the past, both NLSO 

client questionnaires and the results 

of courts-martial and administrative 

EURSWA continued on page 10
10

boards suggest that the quality of defense services remains 

high. In addition, there have been no serious delays 

in providing service. Finally, potential billet savings 

significantly exceed the increased TAD costs associated 

with defense counsel travel.

At the same time, both commands have faced challenges. 

The RLSO needed to devise a method for handling conflict 

legal assistance cases in-house,9 and to work around the 

reduced capacity encountered in LA when judge advocates 

in Rota and Bahrain are involved in courts-martial or other 

trial counsel duties. The NLSO, for its part, is working 

to maintain client satisfaction for 

the 40% of its clients whose only 

access to a defense counsel is by 

phone. In addition, the NLSO is 

working to retain a robust role 

for the senior defense counsel in 

a reduced-attorney environment 

where conflicts of interest can arise.

During the first two quarters of 

the Pilot, outside legal support was 

critical. The supporting CONUS 

reserve legal command (NRLSO 

111) shifted from the NLSO to 

the RLSO and the reserves have 

provided outstanding support to 

the “SJA” offices in LaMaddalena, 

Souda Bay and during base closure 

operations in Iceland and the UK. The CNE, NAVCENT, 

and NAVHOSP Naples judge advocates – plus their 

reserves - continue to provide superb support as Article 32 

investigation officers. Clearly, without external support 

the project could not have flourished. 

In summary, the EURSWA Pilot Project realizes the JAG 

Corps 2020 mandate of developing expeditionary judge 

advocates and legalmen who are ready to fill any surge 

requirement with extremely short lead times. The project 

realizes maximum active-reserve integration and resource 

savings while more efficiently accomplishing the mission.

The Way Ahead

Whether the NLSO becomes a permanent Regional 

Defense Command (RDC) or part of a larger CONUSbased RDC has not been decided and will not be decided 

until the pilot projects, and a recently announced followon pilot project in the Southeast Region, run their course. 

The additional pilot project is intended to further test the 

model, “stress the system” in a robust military justice 

environment, and provide additional lessons learned and 

analyses. Application of lean six sigma tools and the 

recent addition and implementation of CMTIS will allow 

the JAG Corps to capture much-needed metrics and data 

to objectively measure the EURSWA Pilot Project and 

improve the construct. 

“Transformation” – learn it, live it, embrace it. Our 

clients are and we must as well.

Endnotes

1. The judiciary is also engaged in transformation. At the same time as 

the EURSWA Pilot, the Transatlantic Judicial Circuit was disestablished 

and EURSWA cases are now heard by judges traveling from the 

Northern Judicial Circuit in the US or deployed military judges in Iraq 

for cases in SWA. The change permitted the recapture of one O-6 and 

one O-4 Judge billet, formerly located in Naples.

2. Coincidentally, due to CNE delegation 

of authority to CNRE as designated 

commanding officer for FCJ cases under 

Navy cognizance in the EUCOM AOR, 

RLSO FCJ responsibility has increased and 

will result in greater RLSO interaction with 

the U.S. Embassies in Rome, Madrid, and 

Athens.

3. Under the MOA, several NLSO military 

personnel are temporarily assigned to 

the RLSO. In addition, CNP approved a 

request for transfer of reporting senior 

responsibility for these individuals to the 

RLSO CO.

4. Although attached to the RLSO, the 

civilian Budget Officer supports both the 

RLSO and the NLSO.

5. The number of courts-martial and 

administrative boards in the AOR has 

decreased in recent years, and will likely 

continue to decrease. However, personal representation services 

(consultations with clients that do not normally result in the formation 

of an attorney/client relationship) have held steady and, in fact, appear 

to be on the rise for FY-07.

6. As a defense-only command, the NLSO has not experienced requests 

for new types of services. Instead, the NLSO’s challenge is meeting 

traditional needs with Defense Counsel who are not co-located with 

their client over 40% of the time. The RLSO, on the other hand, has 

experienced the receipt of NATO SOFA claims responsibility from 

USSSO Rome, the advent of notarization services to overseas contractor 

personnel, FCJ responsibility for processing cases Italy-wide, and an 

expanded Legal Assistance practice at stand-alone SJA locations. 

7. MilJus TAD cost was roughly $15,000 in FY 05. With the 

commencement of the Pilot, costs in FY 06 rose to $36,500. Costs for 

FY 07 are on course to be moderately higher still.

8. In order to eliminate misunderstandings, the Pilot MOA put CNRE 

and CNRSWA on notice that, while their costs would likely increase, 

“Big Navy” would almost certainly reap larger savings.

9. JAGINST 5803.1C (Rule 1.10) states that “Covered USG attorneys 

working in the same military law office are not automatically 

disqualified from representing a client because any of them practicing 

alone would be prohibited from doing so ...” Nevertheless, to diminish 

even the appearance of conflict, RLSO makes every effort to service the 

conflicted client with an attorney at another RLSO office in the AOR.

“Transformation must be 

embraced as a process, not 

an end-state, with the ultimate goal of us remaining 

a Corps of legal professionals with indispensable 

value to the commanders, 

military personnel, and 

families we serve.”

-- JAG Corps 2020

EURSWA continued from page 9
11

Capt. Nan DeRenzi and Capt. Del 

Crandall were recently selected 

for Combatant Command Staff 

Judge Advocate positions at United 

States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) and United States European 

Command (EUCOM), respectively. 

They are the first judge advocates in the 

Navy JAG Corps’ history to be selected 

for these important positions. Capt. 

Corky Malcom was also selected by 

United States Joint Forces Command 

(JFCOM) to relieve Capt. Alan Kaufman 

this summer. 

“Consistent with SECNAV and CNO 

Guidance for 2007, the JAG Corps is 

always looking for ways to partner and 

leverage capabilities with our sister 

services,” said Rear Adm. Bruce MacDonald, Judge Advocate General of 

the Navy. “We also realize that due to 

our unique experience in international 

and operational law, we have become 

uniquely qualified to shape national 

policy in these areas. We always nominate our best officers. I am proud of the 

numerous opportunities that we have 

been given to serve in these challenging 

and rewarding billets.” 

 Under the leadership of a four-star 

Commander, SOUTHCOM, located in 

Miami, Florida, is responsible for providing contingency planning, operations, and security cooperation for 

Central and South America, the Caribbean (except U.S. commonwealths, territories, and possessions), Cuba and the 

Bahamas, and their territorial waters; 

as well as for the force protection of 

U.S. military resources at these locations. SOUTHCOM is also responsible 

for ensuring the defense of the Panama 

Canal and canal area. 

“As Admiral Jim Stavridis, the 

SOUTHCOM Commander, is fond of 

saying, ‘At SOUTHCOM, we don’t 

launch missiles, we launch ideas,’” said 

DeRenzi. “The SOUTHCOM Area of 

Responsibility is inextricably linked to 

the economic, political, cultural, and 

security fabric of our own nation. I look 

forward to working with Admiral Stavridis and his staff to help forge a full-spectrum approach involving not only the 

U.S. military, but also the inter-agency 

process, to find cooperative solutions to 

the region’s challenges.” 

Also under the leadership of a fourstar Commander, EUCOM is responsible for all of Europe and the Middle East. 

Like SOUTHCOM, EUCOM plans for 

regional contingencies. Also in the near 

future, EUCOM will help stand up the 

new U.S. Africa Command. 

“I hope to build on the great reputation that judge advocates already have at 

EUCOM as ‘enablers’ for the operators, 

planners, and administrative folks on the 

staff,” said Crandall. “Serving overseas 

as a Navy Judge Advocate is an incredibly rewarding experience both professionally and personally. I have served 

in Japan, England, and Italy, and will 

soon PCS to Germany. All have been 

fantastic opportunities for me as well as 

for my family.”

DeRenzi’s and Crandall’s selections 

bring to five the number of Navy judge 

advocates currently serving as combatant command SJAs. Other combatant 

command SJAs are: Capt. Kurt Johnson 

at United States Northern Command 

(NORTHCOM), Capt. Pete Pedrozo 

at United States Pacific Command 

(PACOM), and Kaufman at JFCOM. 

The Navy JAG Corps’ reputation 

as a cadre of outstanding international 

and operational law judge advocates 

has been recognized over the years. 

From 1997 to 2005, Rear Adm. Mike 

Lohr, Rear Adm. Jane Dalton, and Rear 

Adm. (sel) Hal Dronberger served consecutively as the Legal Counsel to the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 

Capt. Jim Crawford was Pedrozo’s 

predecessor at SOUTHCOM. Capt. 

Shelley Young, now retired, was the 

CENTCOM SJA during 9-11 and 

its aftermath. Rear Adm. (sel) Chip 

Wedan and Capt. Dan Donovan stood 

up JFCOM. The Navy JAG Corps has 

played a large part in the legal dialogue 

affecting GWOT and other combat 

operations.

“Serving as the COCOM SJA for 

U.S. Pacific Command was an exceptional experience,” said Crawford. 

“The professional staff of a combatant commander is charged with the 

development and implementation of 

programs and activities in execution 

of the commander’s theater vision and 

intent; a tremendous challenge. It was 

an honor to be a part of the PACOM 

team and contribute in some small way 

to the commander’s efforts in this wide 

and diverse region.”

The Navy JAG Corps appreciates 

these joint assignments for the professional growth and opportunity they 

afford our senior judge advocates. 

“This trend is important in that it reinforces, from the top down, the value of 

having a truly joint manpower structure at all levels within the Combatant 

Commander’s staff,” Crandall said.

Congratulations to the three captains. “We hope that judge advocate 

commanders and lieutenant commanders will be inspired by their example 

and the example of others who have 

served as Combatant Command SJAs,” 

said MacDonald. “It is important that 

we continue to develop outstanding 

international and operational law judge 

advocates who are competitive for 

these critical joint assignments.”

Navy JAGs Take Lead Staff Judge Advocate 

Positions in Combatant Command Staffs

By Capt. Hank Molinengo

Operations and Management
12

When Lt. Col. Paul McConnell first joined the Marine Corps, the idea that he would 

preside over an extremely high-profile 

Army case as a military judge was the 

last thing he could have imagined. 

However, his career path would take 

him from a Marine Corps infantry officer 

to the judge’s bench in Camp Lejeune, 

N.C., and then into an Army courtroom 

to preside over two Abu Ghraib detainee 

abuse cases. McConnell, currently the 

Circuit Judge for the Northern Judicial 

Circuit, was made available for the Abu 

Ghraib cases through a cross-service 

detailing memorandum of agreement 

(MOA) signed by all the services in 2005, 

allowing the service judiciaries to share 

judges when appropriate to do so.

McConnell joined the Marine Corps 

after graduating from Wittenberg University with a Bachelor of Arts in economics. 

“I came from a family that preached 

some sort of service back to the country,” said McConnell. “My father was an 

Army officer in WWII and I wanted to 

one-up him.” 

McConnell was commissioned as an 

infantry officer in 1990. He was a rifle 

platoon commander in Operation Desert 

Storm. He also deployed to Panama and 

Okinawa. In 1993, he decided to attend 

law school.

Attending law school was “more a personal goal I had since attending college,” 

said McConnell. “I thought the Marine 

Corps was temporary, I would serve my 

country and then move on. I saw what 

some of my peers were doing as judge 

advocates and it seemed like an exciting 

thing to do.”

McConnell graduated from Temple 

University in 1996 and, after attending 

Naval Justice School, became a judge 

advocate in the Marine Corps. His first 

tour was at Camp Lejeune where he 

served in a variety of billets including: 

legal assistance, civil law, trial counsel, 

defense counsel, and as chief trial counsel. 

In 2001, with the rank of major, McConnell was selected to be a military judge at 

Camp Lejeune. 

There he presided over nearly 300 

courts-martial in three years. After his 

tour as a trial judge, McConnell was sent 

to The Army Judge Advocate General’s 

Legal Center and School in Charlottesville, Va., where he obtained a Master’s 

of Law degree in military law. This prepared him for his assignment in 2004 to be 

the Deputy Chief Judge of the Navy and 

Marine Corps Trial Judiciary under then 

Chief Judge Capt. John Rolph. McConnell has remained in the Washington 

Navy Yard office, but has switched hats 

from Deputy Chief Judge to his current 

position as Circuit Judge.

In September 2005, the Chief Judges 

from the Army, Navy/Marine Corps, Air 

Force and Coast Guard signed an MOA 

implementing Rule for Courts-Martial 

503. This rule allows the services to 

cross-detail military judges from other 

services to preside over general and special courts-martial world-wide. 

“While Captain Rolph was the Chief 

Judge, he initiated what he called a ‘Sea 

Enterprise Panel,’ pursuant to Sea Power 

21,” said McConnell. “Among other 

things, the Sea Enterprise initiative looked 

at completely reorganizing the entire trial 

judiciary to gain maximum efficiency. 

We went from twelve circuits worldwide 

to six. One of the recommendations was 

to make greater use of the MOA.”

In redoing the circuits, the Navy and 

Marine Corps Trial Judiciary eliminated some of the single judge outposts 

in world-wide locations. One such area 

was the European judge billet located in 

Naples, Italy. Now, the Navy/Marine 

Corps Trial Judiciary may make greater 

use of the Army to help in Europe when 

needed. 

“For example, there are three permanently stationed Army judges in Europe 

who are ready, willing and able to help if 

[a Sailor or Marine] is placed in pre-trial 

confinement in Germany,” said McConnell. “These judges can do an arraignment, which helps eliminate speedy trial 

concerns.”

In 2006, McConnell was detailed to 

preside over two Army cases that arose 

out of alleged misconduct occurring at 

Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq. The Chief 

Judge of the Army, Col. Denise Vowell, 

had completed an investigation for the 

Army into the incidents that were occurring at Abu Ghraib prior to being assigned 

as the Army Chief Judge. Vowell would 

have to recuse herself from serving as a 

military judge for any case dealing with 

Abu Ghraib. She decided that because 

she was Chief Judge and all Army judges 

worked for her, it was a good opportunity 

to make use of the MOA. 

“So she asked Captain Rolph to assist 

by making a judge available from the 

Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary pursuant to the MOA and R.C.M. 503,” said 

McConnell.

As Chief Judge, Rolph was a likely 

choice to preside over the cases, and did 

in fact preside over preliminary motions 

in both courts-martial. However, because 

he was soon to be reassigned to the appellate bench, he made McConnell available. 

“I picked the two cases up as companion cases, in that they were both dog 

handlers and the charges were very similar,” said McConnell. “Many of the witJudge Sharing: Judge Advocate 

Handles High-Profile Army Case

By Jen Zeldis

Public Affairs Officer
13

nesses were the same. They had the same 

supervisors, and it was during the same 

months.” 

McConnell donned the judicial robe, 

which is one of the differences in presiding over Army cases. In the Navy and 

Marine Corps, judges wear a military uniform in court vice a judicial robe. 

“We’ve maintained the custom and 

tradition of the military service by having 

Navy and Marine Corps judges wear a 

military uniform while presiding over 

courts-martial,” said McConnell.

In the Army, Air Force, and the Coast 

Guard, judges wear judicial robes. The 

MOA addresses this difference and states, 

“If judicial robes are worn in the Trial 

Judiciary of the service of the requesting 

party, the detailed military judge should 

wear a robe provided by the requesting 

party.”

It is an easy legal transition for the 

cross-assigned judges because the Rules 

for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules 

of Evidence are the same. The Manual 

for Courts-Martial is the same for all the 

services. The Military Judges Benchbook, used to determine elements of an 

offense and how to instruct the members, 

is an Army publication and is also used by 

all the services. 

“Any causal observer, even one who 

had been to law school, who watched an 

Army case and then watched a 

Navy/Marine Corps case, would 

probably be hard pressed to come 

up with any differences,” said 

McConnell. “But for those of us 

who do it on a daily basis, there 

are some differences that arise – 

but they don’t make a substantive 

difference. It is more stylistic.”

McConnell explained there 

are some customs and traditions 

that have developed over time 

that a judge from a separate service might not be aware of. One 

such difference came up while 

McConnell presided over his two 

Army cases.

“Each time a witness is finished testifying, it has been my 

practice in our courts, to ask the counsel whether they want [the witness] to 

be ‘warned’ or ‘subject to recall,’” said 

McConnell. “The language we routinely 

use is: ‘Counsel, warning or recall?’ And 

usually if the counsel wants them to be 

subject to recall and able to testify later 

– that is when they will tell the judge we 

would like to have the witness held ‘subject to recall.’ And there is a particular 

warning we give the witness under those 

circumstances. In the Army, they don’t 

use that language. They accomplish the 

same result when the judge asks counsel 

if they want the witness excused ‘Permanent or temporary?’ 

“For two days when I would ask 

‘Warning or recall?’ the counsel would 

look at me like I had two heads. We all 

adapted quite quickly to the stylistic differences.” 

One other difference, addressed in the 

MOA, is the use of trial guides. Trial 

guides implement the Rules for CourtsMartial and the Military Rules of Evidence. The trial guide is set up by each 

service’s Chief Judge and varies slightly 

in the language that is used. 

“You get really accustomed to your 

own trial guide,” said McConnell. “For 

example, I know to go to page 47 when 

we are at a certain point in the trial. But 

there are small differences, so you just 

have to thumb around. But ultimately, 

the procedure is the same – one side 

presents their evidence, the other side 

presents their evidence and they are 

subject to the same rules of evidence.” 

Even prior to the MOA, the service 

judges would get together to discuss 

military law when they attended the 

Interservice Military Judges Seminar. 

Hosted once a year by the Air Force 

at Maxwell Air Force Base, all active 

duty and reserve judges from all the 

services get together for a week to get 

updates on the law, and discuss various 

legal questions. 

“Its great to compare notes with the 

other judges,” said McConnell. 

This type of interservice camaraderie and understanding helps to make 

the best use of the MOA. 

McConnell explained that the services will make greater use of the 

MOA, especially as each of the services moves to more worldwide dispersion and smaller bases. 

After five years as a military judge, 

next for McConnell is likely a nonjudicial tour.

“I think being a military judge has 

given me a wonderful perspective, 

especially as it relates to military justice,” said McConnell. “When it comes 

to advising commanders on military 

justice, it is incomparable.” 

McConnell will also bring a 

joint perspective to the military 

commander because of the MOA 

and the interservice dialog.

McConnell had a few words 

of advice to the new judge advocates aspiring to the bench.

“Have fun,” said McConnell. “The most fun and rewarding assignment is your first 

one, because you are entrusted 

with an enormous amount of 

responsibility so fresh out of 

law school. And, if you choose 

to remain in uniformed service 

– you’ll always be surrounded 

by selfless, patriotic Americans. Life is good.”

“Any causal observer, even one 

who had been to law school, who 

watched an Army case and then 

watched a Navy/Marine Corps 

case, would probably be hard 

pressed to come up with any differences. But for those of us who 

do it on a daily basis, there are 

some differences that arise – but 

they don’t make a substantive difference. It is more stylistic.”

-- Lt. Col. Paul McConnell
14

Capt. David Wagner, Capt. Rob 

Blazewick, Capt. Bob Almand, Lt. 

Brian Halliden, and Lt. Brian Mizer 

briefed a class of 77 international students at the Court of Appeals for the 

Armed Forces courthouse Feb. 12. 

The presentations outlined the Uniform Code of Military Justice and 

the relationship of military justice to 

Members of the Office of the Judge Advocate 

General Brief Marshall Center Students

the federal system; Status of Forces 

Agreements (SOFAs) and cooperative engagement in the context of Task 

Force Horn of Africa; an overview of 

the Cavalese cable car incident in Italy, 

illustrating a mature SOFA in action; 

and an appellate case study involving 

the U.S./Japan SOFA. 

This international audience was participating in the Program in Advanced 

Security Studies (PASS), offered 

through the Marshall Center’s College 

of International and Security Studies 

(CISS), Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany. The Marshall Center is a leading transatlantic security and defense 

educational institution dedicated to 

the creation of a more stable security 

environment. Its educational programs 

help advance democratic defense institutions and relations, promote peaceful engagement, and enhance enduring 

partnerships between the nations of 

North America, Europe and Eurasia.

On Feb. 15, four D.C.-area Navy judge advocates 

shared their operational experiences with students at 

Villanova University School of Law. 

In the first of four 15-minute presentations, Lt. 

Cmdr. Scott Johnson, Code 11, discussed his recent 

assignment as legal advisor with the Combined Security Transition Command in Afghanistan, where he 

assisted in establishing the Afghan National Army’s 

first-ever military justice system. Lt. Cmdr. Thomas 

Leary, Code 14, then described his role as attorneyadvisor from 2002 to 2005 with Special Operations 

Forces operating in Iraq and Afghanistan. Next, Lt. 

Kate Kadlec, Code 45, related her experiences in handling detainee operations with Task Force 134 in Iraq. 

Finally, Lt. Brian Halliden described his 2006 deployment to CJTF-Horn of Africa, focusing on the Task 

Force’s efforts in civil military operations. 

A lively 30-minute question-and-answer period 

followed, moderated by Villanova University law 

student, Lt. Eric Matheson, USNR. The audience of 

approximately 30 students and faculty posed insightful questions to each of the panel members. 

“I was impressed by the consideration and respect 

that the law students and faculty showed us. They 

seemed to genuinely appreciate what Navy JAGs have 

accomplished in the field,” said Leary.

Villanova School of Law Welcomes Navy Judge Advocates

An informal reception with the students and faculty 

followed, allowing each of the judge advocates to discuss not only their deployment experiences, but also 

their overall experiences in the JAG Corps. 

“I thought the reception provided a great forum for 

us to discuss the JAG Corps,” said Halliden. “It may 

not be quite like the TV show, but our experiences 

demonstrate that it can be a tremendously rewarding 

career.”

By Lt. Brian Halliden

OJAG General Litigation

JAG Outreach

By Capt. Bob Almand

OJAG General Litigation

Lt. Brian Halliden at Camp Kasenyi, Uganda while training Ugandan Army soldiers as part of Combined Joint 

Task Force-Horn of Africa’s Human Rights training 

program.
15

JAG Outreach

U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of 

Criminal Appeals Takes Oral Arguments 

to George Washington Law School

(left) Military and civilian 

defense counsel for United 

States vs. Gallagher. (lower 

left) Government for United States vs. 

Gallagher. (lower right) Capt. David 

Wagner talks with students during a 

lunch following the oral arguments. 

(middle right) Navy and Marine Corps 

judge advocates observe the case and, 

later, mingled with the law school students. (top right) One Marine Corps and 

two Navy judges hear 

oral argument at George 

Washington Law School.

The U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal 

Appeals heard arguments in the case of United 

States vs. Gallagher on Jan. 25 at George Washington University Law School. All the law school students were invited to observe the oral arguments as 

well as attend a luncheon with judge advocates from 

the Navy and Marine Corps. The U.S. Navy-Marine 

Corps Court of Criminal Appeals periodically holds 

oral arguments at various locations outside of military 

facilities to give members of the public a first hand 

view of the military justice system.
16

OJAG Fiscal and Resource Services, Code 64, held question and answers sessions for 

employees and supervisors during the 

month of February and March. They 

also collected questions from the fleet. 

The following topics were addressed 

during these sessions.

Pay

Those employees eligible for WIGI 

promotions under the GS system 

received a pro-rated increase in base 

salary upon NSPS conversion. If the 

employee had completed one-third the 

time to reach the next step increase, the 

employee received one-third the amount 

of that step increase. Employees also 

saw a slight increase in locality pay as 

it is calculated as a percentage of base 

pay. Those employees already working 

at Full Performance Level (Step 10) did 

not receive any increase in salary. All 

employees under NSPS will now have 

the opportunity to compete for salary 

increases/bonuses based upon job performance.

Band Placement

The band into which you were placed 

was determined by HRO according to 

the guidance provided on the Civilian 

Personnel Management Service website (http://www.cpms.osd.mil/nsps/). 

There are important considerations for 

employees to understand.

NSPS considers a “promotion” to 

be movement into a higher pay band. 

Therefore, employees who are in career 

ladder positions (i.e. former GS 7/9/11) 

have been placed into Band 1 and will 

be promoted into Band 2 upon reaching 

full performance level. 

Employees who supervise only one 

individual are not considered supervisors. (There is an exception to this 

rule in the case of Division Directors.) 

Employees who supervise more than 

one individual may have qualified to be 

placed in the Supervisory band. 

For GS 9 and GS 10 supervisory 

positions with occupational codes that 

would be YA (Professional/Analytical) 

pay schedule, the employee converts to 

pay band 2 of the non supervisory pay 

schedule (YA) and is titled and coded 

supervisory under the mixed position 

criteria in SC1920.2.4 (e.g., a Supervisory Budget Analyst, GS 0560-9, converts to Supervisory Budget Analyst, 

YA 0560-2). GS 11 supervisory positions with subordinate employees in pay 

schedule YA, placed in YC 2 (Supervisory/Manager). GS 11 supervisory 

positions with subordinate employees 

in pay schedule YB (Technical/Support) 

placed in YC 1. However, if management determines the employee personally performs GS 11 work, the employee 

may be placed in the YA 2 band. 

New Hires

New NSPS position descriptions 

(PDs) will be phased in as position 

descriptions are requested. New PDs 

will be simplistic in nature. Specific 

details regarding the job function will 

be found in job objectives rather than 

the PDs. In this transition period, pay 

setting guidance will be drawn from GS 

equivalents. This GS-based guidance 

will be phased out. 

Ratings/Pay Pool

Employees will be rated based on 

their performance according to the 

expectations set in their job objectives. All job objectives have been constructed at the “3-Valued Performer” 

level. JAG raters will have a common 

understanding of the meaning of “3-

Valued Performer” and all other ratings 

based upon standard NSPS Performance Indicators. Employees will not 

be compared or “ranked” to each other, 

but rather, will be compared to the “3-

Valued Performer” level. 

National Security Personnel System

Job Objectives

 Job objectives have been put in 

place for OJAG employees at this time. 

Employees should communicate closely 

with their supervisors to understand the 

expectations of performance and supervisors should discuss the job objectives 

with employees. 

Communication

The supervisor-employee relationship will become increasingly important 

under NSPS. Supervisors and employees will need to have an open forum to 

discuss the employee’s progress toward 

completion of job objectives. Take the 

opportunity to speak often and provide constructive feedback about the 

employee’s performance. The more 

informed each supervisor and employee 

is, the more accurately each will be able 

to assess his/her completion of the job 

objectives. With good communication 

will come a positive work environment, which will breed opportunities 

for excellence. 

By Amy Stevens

Fiscal and Resource Services

Supervisor and employee communication is key to the success of NSPS.

For more information or to ask a question about NSPS, please contact Amy Stevens 

202-685-5286 or at amy.stevens@navy.mil
17

Capt. Dave Hayes

(202) 685-7115 david.f.hayes@navy.mil 

Cmdr. Mary Horrigan

(202) 685-7255 mary.horrigan@navy.mil 

Special Assistant for Transformation (SAT) Staff

Capt.(sel) Rob Taishoff

(202) 685-5462 robert.taishoff@navy.mil 

Lt. Cmdr. Joe Hoelz

(202) 685-5185 joe.hoelz@navy.mil

It is important to understand three important and interrelated efforts being executed by the JAG Corps and the Navy. 

The Navy manages resources under the “Navy Enterprise 

System,” which allows resourcing decisions of supporting 

communities to be driven by identified needs of the warfare “Enterprises” (i.e., air, surface, undersea, net warfare 

and expeditionary combat) or domain “enablers.” As an 

enabler that provides legal services to the enterprises, the 

JAG Corps must be aligned with the needs of the Enterprises 

it supports. 

To ensure the JAG Corps is correctly aligned to those 

needs at the right level of legal services and risk, we have 

contracted with the Center for Naval Analyses (CNA) to 

help us better understand and describe to the warfare Enterprises the services the JAG Corps provides with supporting 

data models, metrics and cost analyses. With this in hand, 

we can work cooperatively with those Enterprises to validate 

JAG Corps functions, capabilities, readiness impacts, and 

resources required to assist senior decision-makers determine levels of capability and acceptable risk. This permits 

identification of readiness impacts if resources are increased 

or decreased.

The JAG Corps contracted with CNA in October 2006 

to complete a functional assessment of officer, enlisted, and 

civilian personnel manning levels, active duty and Reserve, 

workloads, and the way we deliver legal services to the Navy. 

This assessment involves three tasks: Task #1 will collect and 

document the work done by Navy lawyers, paralegals, and 

support staff; Task #2 will assess and model our personnel 

resources (i.e., numbers and skill sets, and whether military 

or civilian, active or Reserve, officer or enlisted) needed to 

Case Management Information System 

(CMTIS), Center for Naval Analyses (CNA) 

Study, and the Navy Enterprise System

accomplish a set amount of work; and, Task #3 will model 

manpower and mission trade-offs to arrive at various levels 

of services. The results of this assessment will enable the 

JAG Corps to compete for resources under the Navy Enterprise System. 

Since October 2006, CMTIS has collected data in all 

areas of our trial and defense practice, with additional 

modules collecting productivity data for Legal Assistance, 

Personnel Representation, Physical Evaluation Boards and 

Staff Judge Advocate services. CMTIS permits the JAG 

Corps to track and manage cases and workloads across the 

Enterprise while capturing attorney productivity and ensuring the timely disposition of military justice cases. CMTIS 

is the foundation for our data collection efforts to allow us 

to accurately measure work output, from which we can then 

determine our optimal personnel resource mix, and develop 

our capabilities or service levels. Ultimately, without full 

and complete CMTIS data, we cannot provide warfare 

Enterprises the information they need to assess and decide 

the level of legal services they want the JAG Corps Legal 

Community to provide. 

To execute our JAG Corps 2020 vision, we must look 

forward, not backward. Full implementation of CMTIS and 

completing the CNA study will provide us with the effectsbased organization the Navy deserves when tough decisions 

on resource allocations are made in the overall Enterprise 

System. This requires the dedicated, daily, cooperation of 

all of our people. It is imperative that everyone participates 

in CMTIS. Please visit the Transformation Office NKO 

website for detailed materials on all of the above that will 

provide a more in-depth understanding. 
18

Bonnie Cressey, 

who is his civilian paralegal. 

“She is the 

back bone of 

this office,” 

said Brewen. 

“This little 

office provides 

service to a lot 

of commands 

and without her 

we would not succeed at all. I am honored to be recognized 

and receive this award, but much of this is attributed to the 

assistance I receive from Bonnie.” 

Awards

LNCM DONNA SAYERS RECEIVES KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT 

COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE AWARD

Lt. Marc Brewen with Capt. Mike McKinnon 

Rear Adm. Flanders presents award to 

LNCM Sayers.

The Naval Personnel Development Command (NPDC) presented 

the Knowledge Management Community of Practice Award for 2006, 

to Master Chief Legalman (Surface 

Warfare) Donna Sayers. The award 

was in recognition of the Legalman 

Community of Practice on NKO. 

The ceremony was held Feb. 9 at 

the Center for Service Support and 

the award was presented by Commanding Officer, Center for Service 

Support Rear Adm. M. Flanders, on 

behalf of NPDC. 

Sayers received the award for 

her commendable achievement in 

the superior performance of her 

Submit your command awards 

or photos to Natalie Morehouse at

natalie.morehouse@navy.mil

Lt. Marc Brewen, from Naval Submarine Base Kings 

Bay, was honored as the recent JAG Corps Officer of the 

Quarter. 

Brewen is the Command Judge Advocate for NSB 

Kings Bay. His job consists of providing legal services to 

all the commands on base as well as the Trident Training 

Facility, Trident Refit Facility, SWFLANT, Marine Corps 

Security Forces Company, Naval Air Station Atlanta, 

Naval Supply School Athens, Ga. and Naval Weapons 

Station Charleston, S.C. 

Brewen was very honored and extremely thankful for 

being recognized for his work. “I feel honored to be chosen 

because it is award based on the entire JAG Corps and not 

just Kings Bay,” Brewen said.

His main supporter and helper in getting this award was 

JAG CORPS OFFICER OF THE QUARTER 

duties as Naval Personnel Development Command Knowledge Management Community of Practice 

Administrator at the Center for 

Service Support, from January to 

December 2006

“While it was an honor and privilege to be recommended and selected 

for this award, the true satisfaction 

comes from the E-mail I receive 

from Sailors on a daily basis, both 

Legalmen and non-Legalmen, on 

how much my efforts on NKO have 

aided them in the ability to perform 

their jobs or prepare for advancement,” said Sayers.
19

Awards

JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL 

& NAVAL LEGAL SERVICE COMMAND 

SAILOR OF THE YEAR

Five of the six finalist visit Washington, DC and visit the sites.

JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL 

CIVILIANS OF THE YEAR

Congratulations to Legalman First Class (Surface Warfare) 

Craig E. Lyons, on his selection as the Judge Advocate General’s 

2006 Legalman of the Year and Legalman Second Class (Surface Warfare/Aviation Warfare) Erica P. Queely, on her selection 

as the Commander, Naval Legal Service Command 2006 Sailor 

of the Year.

LN1 Lyons became a legalman in 2001 and is currently 

assigned to USS Bataan (LHD 5). The Commanding Officer of 

USS Bataan said he is the epitome of the can-do Sailor and cited 

his extraordinary involvement with the crew.

LN2 Queely became a legalman in 2003 and is currently 

assigned to Region Legal Service Office Southwest. She is 

renowned for her maturity, passion, and humility. 

The competition was held at the Washington Navy Yard, 

from March 5-7, 2007. During their visit, the six finalists had 

the opportunity to meet with the Judge Advocate General of the 

Navy and Commander, Naval Legal Service Office. Additionally, they toured the Pentagon, U.S. Supreme Court, National 

Archives, Navy Memorial and Heritage Center, and the historic 

Washington Navy Yard Museum.

The three finalists for Judge Advocate General Legalman 

of the Year were: LN1 Veda L. May, assigned to Commander, 

Strike Fighter Wing, U.S. Atlantic Fleet; LN1 Lourdie B. Powell, 

assigned to USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72); and Lyons.

The three finalists for Naval Legal Service Command Sailor 

of the Year were: LN1 Wanda D. Miller, assigned to Region 

Legal Service Office SE, Jacksonville, Fla.; LN1 Marcelo A. 

Carrillo, assigned to Naval Legal Service Office SW, San Diego, 

Calif.; and LN2 Erica P. Queely, assigned to Region Legal Service Office SW, San Diego, Calif.

Annette L. Pigott was selected as the Judge Advocate 

General’s 2006 Senior Civilian of the Year, and Antonette 

L. Babauta was selected as the Judge Advocate General’s 

2006 Junior Civilian of the Year. All nominations received 

showed the tremendous effort and value the civilian corps 

brings to the JAG community.

Pigott serves as a paralegal specialist in the Office of the 

Vice Chief of Naval Operations. Widely acknowledged 

within the department as an expert in governmental ethics 

and standards of conduct, Pigott flawlessly managed the 

public financial disclosure program for over 100 flag officers and senior executive service members assigned to the 

OPNAV staff and Echelon II commands. Described as the 

backbone of the Vice Chief of Naval Operations’ legal team, 

she is most deserving of this recognition. 

Babauta serves as a legal assistant at Navy Legal Service 

Office Pacific, Branch Office, Guam. The foundation of the 

legal support staff, Ms. Babauta’s experience, guidance, and 

devotion greatly enhanced all office operations and directly 

supported the global war on terrorism by allowing judge 

advocates and legalmen to deploy forward. Described by her 

commanding officer as an indispensable asset to the Guam 

Detachment because of her outgoing personality and sage 

wisdom, Ms. Babauta is truly deserving of this award.

Bravo Zulu to Ms. Pigott and Ms. Babauta for their outstanding accomplishments. We wish each of you continued 

success in 2007!

Rear Adm. Bruce MacDonald, Annette Pigott and Antoinette 

Babauta, Rear Adm. Houck, and Capt. Molinengo after an 

awards ceremony at the Washington Navy Yard. 
20
21
22
23