DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 8254-08
15 January 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.29 October 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by the Commandant of Marine Corps dated 10
October 2008, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, and notwithstanding the advisory opinion from the
Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Board found that the evidence
Submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable
Material error or injustice.
The Board found no merit in your contention that the nonjudicial
punishment (NUJP) you received on 15 February 2005 lacks
signatures and is incomplete. Although one section of your
official military personnel file (OMPF) contains an incomplete
record of NUP, a different section contains a properly completed
record of the NUP, to include appropriate signatures. It is clear
that neither you nor the author of the advisory opinion reviewed
your entire OMPF.
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,
lw Won
W. DEAN PFEIFFHR
Executive Direcko
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00002-08
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. In accordance with the reference, an application for correction of a record must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice unless the Board excuses the untimely filing in the interest of justice. No corrective action is warranted in this case because Applicant fails to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10794-07
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. You requested we provide an advisory opinion on sis ee reer (hereinafter “Applicant”) removal of a page 11 entry to his service record book (SRB) dated 12 July 1999. On 12 July 1999, Applicant received a page 11 entry stating that he was eligible but not recommended for promotion to Sergeant.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02207-08
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 petitioner argues that there is no record anywhere in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) or his service record book (SRB) that documents the NUP, and therefore this fitness report should be removed. The Board found that the lack of documentation elsewhere in the petitioner’s...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09279-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 26 November 2007, a copy of which is attached. 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 | CY2008 | 02965-08
In addition, the Board considered the advisory Opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 24 April 2008, a copy of which is attached. 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. Applicant now requests that his NUP be removed from his record stating that his driving while impaired charge was dismissed by the civilian courts.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8368 13
The Board, consisting of Messrs. Exnicios, Gattis, and Sproul, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on-.3 September 2014 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. d. An AO, enclosure (4), received from the Marine Corps regarding Petitioner’s request to remove the incomplete documentation recommends relief. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11045-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2008. The Board did not consider removing your NJP, as you did not specifically request this. 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 | CY2014 | NR0836 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7O1S. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his naval record he corrected by removing incomplete and inaccurate derogatory material, specifically, a unit punishment book (UPB) entry which documents a nonjudicial punishment (NUJP) dated 31 January 2013. d. That any and all materials or entries inconsistent with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04010-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 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 | CY2007 | 06062-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 14 August 2007, a copy of which is attached. You requested an advisory opinion on the revocation of Staff Sergeant Valdez’s (hereinafter “Applicant”) appointment to the grade of Gunnery Sergeant and the removal of a charge he received at Battalion level Non-Judicial Punishment (NUP) . On 3 May 2007, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, informed the Applicant that he was revoking his promotion...