DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
REC
WASHINGTON DC 20370-
05100 Doeket No: 07134-11
26 July 2011
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title i0 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 20 July 2031. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You entered active duty in the Navy on 1 September 1994, and
served honorably until 17 November 2009, when you received
nonjudicial punishment {(NJP) for making false official
statements, larceny in the amount of $4,200, and conduct being
unbecoming an officer. On 18 November 2009, you received a
punitive letter of reprimand. On 23 November 2009, you informed
your chain of command that you had no intention of appealing the
NIP. On 8 December 2009, you submitted a statement to the Bureau
of Personnel, in which you humbly apologized for your violations
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and stated that there was
no excuse for your action.
In its review of your application, the Board considered all
mitigating factors, such as your overall record of service.
However, the Board found these factors were insufficient to
warrant removing your NJP and all derogatory material. The Board
concluded that your commanding officer's decision to impose this
NUP was appropriate and that it was administratively and
procedurally correct as written and filed. The Board further
concluded that removal of the NIP or modification of the charge
was not warranted. The Board thus concluded that there was no
error or injustice in your NUP. 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,
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05539-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2009. 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 | CY2008 | 09424-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2009. 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 this regard, you did not appeal your NUPs or submit rebuttal statements to your substandard performance evaluations.
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 | CY2009 | 01885-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 November 2009. 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 | CY2007 | 11317-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 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. You contend in your application, in effect, that the nature of your offenses recorded in your service record for which you received NJP on 10...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01892-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 2009. 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 25 August 1984, the separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
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 | CY2009 | 06961-09
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 2 June 1983, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct. The Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since a discharge under other than honorable conditions is often directed when a Sailor is discharged for misconduct.
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 | CY2011 | 00400-11
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...