DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 8215-08
25 March 2009
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 4 February 2009. 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 enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 25 July
1988. On 6 December 2007 you received nonjudicial punishment for
forgery and making a false official statement. The punishment
imposed consisted of an oral reprimand. On 29 April 2008 you
received a second nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized
absence of four days, leaving your appointed place of duty
without a relief, and making a false official statement. The
punishment imposed consisted of reduction in rate to YN2, E-5,
forfeiture of one-half month’s pay for two months, with one month
suspended, and restriction for 60 days, which was suspended. On
31 July 2008 you were transferred to the Fleet Reserve in grade
E-5.
The Board found no merit in your request for reinstatement to
YN1. It 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
credibic 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.
Te is regretted that the circumstances of your case ere 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 ss)
Executive Dikac
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09530-08
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 | CY2008 | 05865-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 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. 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 | CY2010 | 09380-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. 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 | CY2011 | 01402-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 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 Board, in its review of your entire record and application, .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09424-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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. In this regard, you did not appeal your NUPs or submit rebuttal statements to your substandard performance evaluations.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04483-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _ application on 18 November 2909. 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 Board found no merit in your request to remove the nonjudicial punishment of 6 May 1981, which you contend was imposed on you because of your race.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01408-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 November 2010. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07087-08
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 Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for recharacterization of your service on 4 April 2008. 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 | CY2006 | 05232-06
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 28 July 1999. The punishment imposed consisted of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07611-03
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to est ablishhe exploit of probablernaterial erroror injusticeYou enlisted in the Navy on 29 September 2000 at age 21 and served without disciplinary incident until 26...