DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BUG
Docket No: 1648-13
16 May 2013
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. Your previous case, docket
number 8067-12, was denied on 14 August 2012.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 14 May 2013. 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, and the Board's file on your prior
case,
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 23 November 2011 you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order
(sexual harassment), making inappropriate comments and
unwelcomed sexual advances, and using indecent language (three
instances). Your punishment was 60 days restriction and
reduction to pay grade E-5. You appealed the NUP, however, it
was denied.
Administrative separation processing was initiated by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. You elected
to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board
(ADB) which found that you did not commit misconduct and
recommended retention. These facts are in concurrence with your
counsel’s letter dated 10 April 2013.
The Board found that you accepted NJP rather than demanding a
trial by court-martial, and concluded that your commanding
officer’s decision to impose it, and the punishment awarded was
appropriate, and that it was administratively and procedurally
correct and appropriately filed.
forum to determine whether or not a service member should be
retained in the military. In view of the above, the Board voted
to again deny relief. 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
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,
by. ated
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D¥rettor
Enclosure
Copy to:
Gary Meyers, Esq.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1919 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. 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 | CY2002 | 04861-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, application on 14 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to 30 days of confinement at hard labor and a forfeiture of $426. other than honorable discharge was appropriate, based on your NJP and court martial conviction.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05648 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 March 2013. 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 | CY2014 | NR4292 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2014. The Board found that your commanding officer's decision to impose the foregoing NJP, and the punishment imposed, was appropriate, and that it was administratively and procedurally correct. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05203-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2013. 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' were sentenced to confinement for 42 months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2578 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR6433 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05445-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06218-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulation 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 injusticeThe Board found that YOU reenlisted in the Navy on 15 November 2002 after more than three years of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4503 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.