DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 09852-0S
25 June 2020
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 23 June 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 ali 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.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
6 July 2004, at age 17. On 10 November 2008, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for provoking speeches or gestures.
You were awarded reduction in pay grade and 30 days extra duty.
You waived your rights to have your case tried by a court~
martial, consult counsel, or submit a statement.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, conduct,
and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant removal of the
NIP from your official records. Regarding your allegation chat
other Sailors were treated differently, you are advised that the
commanding officer’s decision to impose NUP and the punishment
imposed rest solely with his discretion in each case. The Board
noted that you provided no evidence to support your allegation.
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,
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 | CY2008 | 05539-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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 | CY2014 | NR7262 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2015. 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 material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04718-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this materi'al considered by the Board consisted Board. of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The On 31 May 1966 The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07312-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. NJPs, the Board concluded that the Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05040-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 19 November 1956 you received NJP for The punishment The punishment imposed was 10 On 13 February 1957 you were convicted by summary court-martial of failure to obey a lawful order and damaging government property. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04663-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 7 February 1958 you received NJP for failure to The punishment imposed was The punishment imposed was a reduction you were convicted by summary court-martial On 22 February 1958, of two instances of breach of the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09615-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction df Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2003. The punishment imposed was forfeitures of $275 per month for two months and 45 days of restriction and extra duty On 22 April 1982 you were counseled concerning your past performance and warned that further misconduct could result in processing for a less than honorable discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05295-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant removal of the NUP from your official record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07978-02
On 10 June 1985 you received your third NJP for disobedience and were awarded a $200 forfeiture of pay. On ason of !you were ation, % At that time you On 30 July 1985, after present your case to an administrative discharge board 22 June 1985 an ADB recommended a general discharge by r misconduct. 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.