DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 400-11
2 February 2011
This ig 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 22 November 2007 you were the subject of
a traffic violation, specifically, driving while under the
influence of alcohol. Shortly thereafter, on 3 December 2007,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for reckless operation
of a vehicle. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade
E-4, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, and a $2,062
forfeiture of pay. As a result, you received an adverse fitness
report for the period from 1 October to 3 December 2007 which
noted that you were not recommended for promotion due to the
imposition of NUP. The record reflects that you did not appeal
the NUP, and as such, presumably accepted the findings of guilt.
The Board concluded that your commanding officer's decision to
impose the foregoing NJP, 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,
i
i ' W ont a
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03127-11
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 | CY2010 | 07374-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2011. The rec ra reflects that on 17 May 2007 you were subsequently found guilty of only one specification of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman for the period cited “between on or about November 2004 and on or about May 2005." The Board concluded that your commanding officer's decision to impose the foregoing NUP, and the punishment imposed,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 08179-11
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. On two occasions, 19 September 1996, and 19 November 2007, you signed and acknowledged the Navy’s policy concerning sexual harassment. commanding officer submitted a request for detachment for cause by reason of sexual harassment, which you were allotted sufficient time to respond.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04246-11
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 | 00331-11
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 | 05094-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 09411-10
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 | CY2012 | 10422 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 November 2012. On 11 February 2011, you did file an appeal and on 18 February 2011, your appeal was denied. 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 | CY2011 | 13164 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2012. On 18 April 2011, a report of the NUP was forwarded to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command (NPC). The results of the BOI were forwarded and you were informed that you would be retained in the Navy, but that the NUP would become part of your official record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00203-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your — application on 11 January 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...