DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 12184-08
23 April 2010
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 27 January 2010. 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 on 16 December
2003. On 30 August 2006 you received nonjudicial punishment for
violating a lawful general order by creating a hostile work
environment and violating a lawful general order by wrongfully
viewing sexually oriented adult material on a government
computer. The punishment imposed consisted of forfeiture of one-
half month's pay per month for two months, restriction and extra
duty for 45 days, and reduction in rank.
On 12 September 2006 your commanding officer recommendeda that you
be separated from the Navy with a general discharge by reason of
misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. When
informed of this recommendation, you waived the right to consult
with counsel and to present your case to an administrative
Gischarge board. On 5 October 2006 you were separated with a
general discharge.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and overall
record, and the contention that you were made an example of by a
command struggling with a poor equal opportunity climate. The
Board concluded that those factors were insufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge or an reinstatement on
active duty.
The Board found no merit in your request to set-aside the
nonjudicial punishment. 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 credible evidence that you
did not commit the charged offenses.
In view of the foregoing, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
Ft is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be teken. 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,
\ wu
W. DEAN PF
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07698-09
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. Nevertheless, it appears that on 23 July 2007, you were granted access to your computer account and again violated the SAAR by accessing an unauthorized website and downloading pornographic Materials. Shortly thereafter, on 26 September 2007, your appeal was denied and the NJP upheld...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02306-09
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. Subsequently, the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction, and on 7 March 2006, you were so discharged and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00272-07
On 24 July 2006 your commanding officer recommended to the Navy Personnel Command (NAVPERSCOM) that you not be reenlisted. However, given the available evidence, the Board concluded that the commanding officer acted reasonably in concluding that you committed the offense and that nonjudicial punishment was appropriate. 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 | CY2010 | 10699-10
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 thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in your reentry code. 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 | 05457-06
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 7 November 1983 after three years of prior...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05850-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2010. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was snsufficient 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 | 03653-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2009. Concerning your request for removal of the two above fitness reports, the Board found that you did not make any contentions of error or injustice in connection with either report and no material errors are apparent in either. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04246-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 April 2011. 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 foregoing civil case, specifically, the administrative action to suspend or revoke your driving privileges for driving under the influence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13231-10
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. Finally, Sailors separated by reason of misconduct normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such the Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04558-05
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 4 November 1988. On 27 April 1989 you received a...