DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
D:hd
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
Docket No. 12223-10
19 January 2012
Dear ‘lila
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.
You requested, in effect, setting aside your reduction from AC2 (pay
grade E-5) to AC3 (pay grade E-4), imposed as a result of the vacation,
on 26 May 1983, of the suspended reduction awarded at your nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) proceedings of 21 April 1983; and setting aside your
reduction from AC3 to ACAN (pay grade E-3), awarded at your NUP of
26 May 1983.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
19 January 2012. 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. In
addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the
Navy Personnel Command dated 20 September 2011 with reference (a),
a copy of which is attached. The Board also considered your letter
dated 7 November 2011.
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. In
this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinion. 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 PFEI
Executive Di
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04260-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2012. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06136 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 February 2012. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12541 11
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, in concurrence with the ADB, also recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11984-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 10 August 2011. The sentence imposed wag confinement for 45 days, a forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct discharge (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 | CY2010 | 06092-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 March 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. 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 | CY2010 | 02646-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 2011. On 6 June 1983 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 drug abuse, and on 10 June 1983, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05803-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 2011. On 15 October 1979, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit. 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 | 11818-09
A three-member panel of the Board’for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2010. On 30 June 2002 an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. 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 | CY2012 | 00078-12
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by removing all references to the nonjudicial punishment (NUP) imposed on 12 June 2009. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Exnicios, Pfeiffer, and Zsalman, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 19 January 2012 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00286-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2012. 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 9 May 1986, you received NUP for being UA for one day.