Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08342-09
Original file (08342-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS.
Docket No: 8342-09
21 August 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 12 August 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 on 24 July 2007.

On 29 August 2008 you received nonjudicial punishment for failing
to obey a lawful orders or regulation by operating a motorcycle.
without a license, insurance, or having completed required
driving courses, and absence from appointed place of duty. The
punishment consisted of restriction and extra duty for 45 days
and reduction in rate.

The Board found no merit in your request to remove the
nonjudicial punishment of 29 August 2008. 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. Accordingly, your an
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,

ly Bee

‘W. DEAN PFEIBRERE
Executive Di ter

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09380-10

    Original file (09380-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 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 | CY2011 | 00223-11

    Original file (00223-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2011. However, the Board found these factors were insufficient to warrant changing your reentry code due to your two NUP’s, and being an alcohol rehabilitation failure. 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 | NR11155 14

    Original file (NR11155 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 2015. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case.

  • 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 | CY2008 | 07113-08

    Original file (07113-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 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 | CY2008 | 08254-08

    Original file (08254-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on.29 October 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 | CY2008 | 08642-08

    Original file (08642-08.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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07197-08

    Original file (07197-08.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 June 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. On 20 August 2008, an ADB unanimously found that you had committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and recommended discharge...