Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05099-12
Original file (05099-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

SJN
Docket No: 05099-12
11 July 2012

 

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 July 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.

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.

The Board found that on 9 March 2012, you were the subject of
captain’s mast for six specifications of failing to obey an order
or regulation that occurred between 2 April 2008 and 17 October
2011. A copy of your nonjudicial punishment (NJP) package
obtained from your command shows you signed a statement
acknowledging that you were fully advised of your legal rights
pertaining to the hearing, given an opportunity to review and
examine all evidence against you, and were informed of your
appeal rights. You ultimately received NJP for one specification
that occurred on 17 October 2011, for violating a lawful
regulation, to wit: Navy Recruiting Manual, by wrongfully
advising a Navy applicant to withhold information regarding pre-
service prescribed medication. You received a reduction in
paygrade and a forfeiture of pay. Additionally, you were
counseled about all six specifications and warned that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. You
did not submit an appeal of the NJP, but simply submitted a
request for leniency of your punishment regarding your forfeiture
of pay. Further, you stated, in part, that you understood that
there were consequences for everything that you do wrong and that
to part of lite.
The Board concluded that your commanding officer's decision to
impose NUP was appropriate, and administratively and procedurally
correct as written and filed. The Board further concluded that
the removal of the NUP 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. 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 Di

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2012 | 05965-12

    Original file (05965-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 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 | CY2012 | 00543-12

    Original file (00543-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your © application on 24 January 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. because the evidence does not support a finding that you were on duty or that you were drunk.

  • 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 | CY2012 | 10422 12

    Original file (10422 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 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 | 13164 11

    Original file (13164 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 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 | CY2010 | 07374-10

    Original file (07374-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2012 | 00998-12

    Original file (00998-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02336-11

    Original file (02336-11.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 November 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. Further, on 23 May 1994, you received NUP for breaking restriction which was imposed on 29 March 1994.