Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06253-06
Original file (06253-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
         DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



         SMW
          Docket No: 6253-06
         3 November 2006
         

This is in reference to your applications for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provision 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 1 November 2006. 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.
On 29 August 1984 you enlisted in the Navy Reserve at age 17, and on 21 August 1985 you were ordered to active duty. On 13 January and 20 June 1986 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for three instances of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling about five days, disobedience of a lawful order, failure to obey a lawful order, and uttering a racial slur.
On 21 June 1986 your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. In connection with this processing, you were advised of the consequences of receiving such a discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 13 July 1986 the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 18 July 1986 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. The Board also considered your contention that you did not utter the racial slur that led to your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterizatiOn of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct. The Board also noted that you waived the right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. Finally, regarding your contention, there is no evidence in the record to support it, and you provided no such evidence. Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.











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,



                   W. DEAN PFEIFFER
          Executive Director
        











































2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6666 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR6666 14_Redacted.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 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 | CY2010 | 04594-10

    Original file (04594-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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 | CY2010 | 03627-10

    Original file (03627-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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 | CY2011 | 01041-11

    Original file (01041-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08211-07

    Original file (08211-07.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 26 October 1985, you enlisted in the Naval Reserve at age 17 with parental consent. On 29 October...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06295-06

    Original file (06295-06.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 injsutice.On 7 December 1983 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18 and served without incident until 24 August...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01582 12

    Original file (01582 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 4 December 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 | CY2013 | NR8340 13

    Original file (NR8340 13.pdf) 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. On 1 October 1986, the separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct. 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 | CY2007 | 07945-07

    Original file (07945-07.pdf) 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. On 25 September 1986 the discharge authority approved these recommendations and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 2 October 1986, you were so separated. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01045-11

    Original file (01045-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your case you be discharged under other by reason of misconduct .. The directed an OTH discharge by of a serious offense. 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.