DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 3087-10
29 March 2011
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 16 February 2011. 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 2 May 1984. On
30 January 1985 you received nonjudicial punishment for an
indecent assault.
A special court-martial convened on 6 June 1985 and found you
guilty of assault with the intent to commit rape, use of indecent
language, and dereliction of duty. The court sentenced you to
confinement at hard labor for five months, forfeiture of $100.00
per month for five months, and a bad conduct discharge. You were
so discharged with a bad conduct discharge on 25 January 1988.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
service record, and the unsubstantiated contention that you were
unjustly court-martialed. The Board concluded that those factors
were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your service,
given the nature and severity of your offenses. In addition, the
Board has no authority to disturb the findings or sentence of a
court-martial based on a claim of incompetent counsel.
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,
Wu A>,
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D oO
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11330-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all, material gubmitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. As a result of the NIS investigation, you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of five specifications of indecent assault against female Marines, peeping through a window of a Female Marine, looking into the bathroom of a female Marine, and unlocking a bathroom door and peeping...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10733-10
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 discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. 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 | CY2009 | 02100-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materiai 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 | CY2002 | 07139-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 March 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your record reflects that you served for a year and seven months without disciplinary incident but on 14 April 1981 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for assault and were awarded a $150 forfeiture of pay. received...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09080-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2008. In this regard, there is no evidence that you previously received a general discharge. 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 | CY2001 | 06032-01
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 28 June 1982 for The record reflects that you were advanced four years at age 21. to BTFA (E-2) and served without incident until 25 February 1983, when you were convicted by special court-martial of communicating You were sentenced to confinement at hard a threat and assault. On 8 April 1983 the convening authority approved the You were released from During the 16 month period from September 1983 to January 1985 Your offenses you received...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06867-06
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. On 6 November 2002, the Naval Clemency Board mitigated the dishonorable discharge to a bad conduct discharge. 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 | CY2002 | 03189-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures'applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to confinement at hard forfeiture of $413 per month for six paygrade E-l, and a bad conduct discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Feb 01 10_59_55 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 1999. 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. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11234-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2011. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...