Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04726-06
Original file (04726-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

                                                                        TJR
                                                                                          Docket No: 4726-06                                                                                                11 January 2007






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 9 January 2007. 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.
You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 30 January 1987 at age 18 and began a period of active duty on 6 April 1987. You served without disciplinary incident until 18 August 1987, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order. On 12 September 1987 you received NJP for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 32 days.
On 3 November 1989 you were convicted by summary court’-martial (SCM) of an 84 day period of UA and sentenced to a $200 forfeiture of pay, confinement at hard labor for 30 days, and reduction to paygrade E-1.
On 30 November 1989 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commiSsion of a serious offense. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 4 December 1989 your commanding officer recommended separation by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 12 December 1989 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 15 December 1989 you were so discharged.












The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, post service conduct, and the passage of time. It also considered your assertions that you should not still be punished for your youthful mistakes, and that you would like another chance to honorably serve your country. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which resulted in two NJPs, a court-martial conviction, and three lengthy periods of UA. Further, the Board noted that you were given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. Finally, no discharge is automatically upgraded due solely to the passage of time. 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,


ROBERT D. Z SALMAN
Acting Executive Director







2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09598-06

    Original file (09598-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.On 25 July 1985 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18 and served without incident for more than 18...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00420-07

    Original file (00420-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02730-11

    Original file (02730-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06798-06

    Original file (06798-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 an conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Boar found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 2 June 1986 y u enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 12 January 1989 you received NJP for three...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10771-10

    Original file (10771-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 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. 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 | CY1999 | 08559-98

    Original file (08559-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. On 7 July 1989, you missed ship's movement and were placed in an unauthorized absence (UA) status until you surrendered on board on 2 August 1989. were being...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05741-07

    Original file (05741-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2008. On 15 January 1990, you began a UA that ended on 3 February 1990, a period of about 19 days. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct that continued even after you were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05571-06

    Original file (05571-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Naval Reserve on 7 February 1987 and began a period of active duty on 11 February...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8690 13

    Original file (NR8690 13.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 September 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. On 25 January 1989, the ADB found that you committed misconduct (commission of a serious offense) and recommended that you be separated with an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04327-06

    Original file (04327-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 29 December 1997 at age 20. About six months later, on 29 June 2001, you...