DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
REC
Docket No: 05295-10
22 September 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 22 September 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.
Biter 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 Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 26 March 1977, at age 19. You served honorably until
16 April 1999, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
committing indecent acts or liberties with a minor. You were
awarded forfeitures of $275.00 and 14 days restriction. 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, and allegation that your case was
treated differently because you were uncertain if you were going
to pursue a career in the Marine Corps. Nevertheless, the Board
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant removal
of the NUP from your official record. Regarding your contention
of not knowing if you were going to pursue a career in the Marine
Corps or not, your case was treated no differently. You are
advised that the commanding officer’s decision to impose NUP and
the punishment imposed rested solely within his discretion. 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,
W. DEAN PF
Executive DiyeWtor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09852-09
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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3945 14
aA three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2015. Additionally, the Board noted that you did not appeal the NUP and concluded that its removal from your record was unwarranted. 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 | CY2007 | 09635-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2008. Although it is not stated in the record, it appears that you elected to waive the right to have your case considered by an administrative discharge board. Please be advised that NUJP evidence is routinely destroyed after several years, and the only evidence is the entry in your service record showing that you received NJP for wearing an earring...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05217-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2010. 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. 1 December 1987, you received NUP for making a false official statement, destruction of property and urinating in an elevator.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 06939 12
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 was no error or injustice in your NUP. 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 | 06005-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2010. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01608-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01408-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 November 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01094-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 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 recharacterization of your discharge given your record of seven...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00021-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. On 30 August 1989, you received NJP for UA Erom your appointed place of duty. 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.