Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00746-07
Original file (00746-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS
Docket No: 746-07
1 May 2008

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
States Code section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 March 2008. 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 you reenlisted in the Navy on 13 February
2002. On 22 November 2002 you received nonjudicial punishment

for two months, restriction for 30 days, extra duty for 45 days,
all suspended for six months, and reduction in pay grade E-5. on
31 December 2005 you were transferred to the Fleet Reserve.

 

The Board found no merit in your request for reinstatement to E-6
and restoration to active duty for two years under a high year
tenure waiver. The Board concluded that your commanding officer
acted reasonably in your case, and that he was in the best
position to resolve the factual issues and to impose appropriate
punishment. There is no credible evidence that you did not
commit the charged offenses. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.

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,

Tek na

ROBERT D. SALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01143-07

    Original file (01143-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2008. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10707-07

    Original file (10707-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. As service members do not have the right to reenlist at the expiration of their enlistments, you would not be entitled to reinstatement or reenlistment even if the Board were to determine that you had not used illegal drugs. Since you have not established that you should have been...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08215-08

    Original file (08215-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2009. 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. The punishment imposed consisted of an oral reprimand.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09530-08

    Original file (09530-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 July 2008 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06484-07

    Original file (06484-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Your commanding officer recommended your request be approved, and on 2 August 2004 the discharge authority directed an honorable discharge by reason of convenience of the government due to a reduction in force. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11150-07

    Original file (11150-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 you enlisted in the Navy on 21 October 2004. The punishment consisted of a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11293-06

    Original file (11293-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 2 February 2007, a copy of which is attached.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. 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 | CY2008 | 00572-08

    Original file (00572-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2008. 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 | CY2009 | 00471-09

    Original file (00471-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Your commanding officer did not contest the findings or recommendation of the ADB; however, he denied your request that he set-aside the related NUP. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10014-07

    Original file (10014-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 17 October 2002, a service record entry was made which stated that a psychiatric evaluation conducted on 28 August 2002, diagnosed you with dysthymia and having an avoidant personality disorder, both of which existed prior to enlistment, and concluded by recommending an expeditious...