DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1004
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 998-12
30 January 2012
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 30 January 2012. 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 noted you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) .on 9
April 2008 for verbally abusing and threatening another Marine
during a telephone conversation and humiliating and berating
members of your platoon by creating and displaying a “bitch
.list.” The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade E-4 and
&a $1,948 forfeiture of pay. The Board further noted that you did
not submit an appeal to the NUP, and as reflected on your fitness
report for the period from 1 April 2008 to 11 April 2008, you
acknowledged that your actions were unacceptable and accepted the
findings of guilt to the foregoing offenses. In this regard, the
Board concluded that your commanding officer’s decision to impose
this NJP was appropriate and that it was administratively and
procedurally correct as written and filed. The Board further
concluded that removal of the NJP or modification of the charges
therein is not warranted, and that such action would be unfair to
your peers, against whom you will compete for promotions and
assignments. 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,
W. DEAN P re E
Executive Dir
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05099-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 July 2012. You did not submit an appeal of the NJP, but simply submitted a request for leniency of your punishment regarding your forfeiture of pay. 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 | 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 | CY2007 | 07599-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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. On 21 January 1966 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for an 85 day period of unauthorized absence (UA).
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 | CY2013 | NR3108 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2014. It was also noted on that evaluation that you had received three NJP’s and were not recommended for retention. 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 | 00959 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 February 2012. 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 | CY2007 | 07047-07
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 enlisted in the Navy on 19 January 1981 at age 18. The punishment imposed was extra duty and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07049-07
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 enlisted in the Navy on 25 October 2000 at age 22. On 19 April 2001 this recommendationwas...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05669-07
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 enlisted in the Navy on 31 July 2002 at age 19 and served for a year and three months without...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4963 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 2015. 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 3 February 2011, you received NJP for disobedience and communicating a threat.