DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SUN
Docket Ne: 05965-12
19 July 2012
This 1s 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 17 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 7 September 2011, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for assaulting another Marine. You
received a reduction in paygrade, a forfeiture of pay, and extra
duty. You appealed your commanding officer’s decision, which was
denied on 20 September 2011, stating, in part, that the
punishment was just and proportionate to the offense.
The Board concluded that your commanding officer’s decision to
impose NJP was appropriate, and it was 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
Boarag 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,
\D Waansthe,
W. DEAN PF E
Executive Diredtbr
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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR5694 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 00543-12
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 | 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 | 04260-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2012. 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. 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 | 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 | 07134-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval’ Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2031. 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 18 November 2009, you received a punitive letter of reprimand.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0424 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 March 2014. You also received an adverse performance evaluation for 16 September 2010 to 6 February 2011. 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 | CY2013 | NR1449-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 2014. 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...