DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 7262-14
23 July 2015
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. The application was filed ina
timely manner.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 24 June 2015. 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.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
1 September 2010. You served for a year and one month without
disciplinary incident, but on 3 November 2011, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful
regulation by wrongful use of spice. The punishment imposed was
a forfeiture of pay and reduction in paygrade. The record
reflects that you did not appeal the NUP, and as such,
presumably accepted the finding of guilt. On 31 August 2014,
you were honorably release from active duty and transferred to
the Navy Reserve.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to remove the NUP. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case. The Board noted that your commanding officer’s
decision to impose the foregoing NUP, and the punishment thereto
was appropriate and that it was administratively and
procedurally correct as written and filed and removal from your
record is unwarranted. 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 within one year from the date of the Board's
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5338 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2015. Your commanding officer’s decision to impose NUP was appropriate, and is administratively and procedurally correct as written and filed. 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 | CY2014 | NR11993 14
- A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. The BOI found by a vote of three to zero, that you had committed misconduct, and although -the reason was supported by evidence, found that there was not sufficient evidence to recommend your separation from the Navy. The .Board found that the CO’s decision to.impose NJP was based on facts and circumstances surrounding the incident, and that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7443 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on S June 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR4304 14
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 took into consideration your post service medical evaluations and subsequent diagnosis of bipolar disorder. 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 ex injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5468 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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. 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 | CY2015 | NR767 15
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of material error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1096 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11597 14
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 3 March 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. After careful...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3945 14
aA three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2015. Additionally, the Board noted that you did not appeal the NUP and concluded that its removal from your record was unwarranted. 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 | CY2014 | NR3488 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2015. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insuffi 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 error or...