Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00331-11
Original file (00331-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

Docket No: 331-11
2 February 2011

 

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 1 February 2011. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 on 14 December 2009 you were the subject of
a traffic violation, specifically, reckless driving and/or
speeding while operating a government vehicle. As a result, on 9
April 2010, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure
to obey a lawful order and four specifications of reckless
driving. The punishment imposed was a reduction to paygrade E-4,
which was suspended for six months. The record reflects that you
did not appeal the NJP, and as such, presumably accepted the

findings of guilt.

The Board concluded that your commanding officer's decision to
impose the foregoing NUP, and the punishment thereto, was
appropriate, and that it was administratively and procedurally
correct as written and filed. Finally, the Board concluded that
there was no evidence in the record to support removal of the
NIP. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

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,

\ps
N pant den
j r

Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09411-10

    Original file (09411-10.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 February 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 | CY2011 | 04246-11

    Original file (04246-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 April 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. The foregoing civil case, specifically, the administrative action to suspend or revoke your driving privileges for driving under the influence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00400-11

    Original file (00400-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 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 | 13721-10

    Original file (13721-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of thes Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 January 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with adnfiinistrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board, Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of yoir application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01519-11

    Original file (01519-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. Finally, the Board concluded that there was no evidence in the record to support removal of the NUP.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03127-11

    Original file (03127-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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. The Board concluded that your commanding officer's decision to impose the foregoing NUP, and the punishment imposed, was appropriate, and that it...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08684-07

    Original file (08684-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A thfee-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 | CY2010 | 06151-10

    Original file (06151-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 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. You served without disciplinary incident until 6 July 1978, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05454 11

    Original file (05454 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 6 March 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. 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 | CY2009 | 01596-09

    Original file (01596-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. 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...