DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMW
Docket No: 10056-06
5 April 2007
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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 4 April 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.
On 28 December 1989 you enlisted in the Navy at age 20 and served
without incident until 9 August 1990, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a seven day unauthorized absence
(UA) and assault. You were counseled on that same date regarding
deficiencies in your performance and conduct, and warned that
further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an
other than honorable discharge. However, on 18 December 1990
suspended punishment from the NUP was vacated due to continued
misconduct, and on 19 December 1990 you received NJP for two
instances of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and
failure to obey a lawful order. Once again, you were counseled
regarding deficiencies in performance and conduct, and warned
that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or
discharge. On 13 February 1991 you received NUP for assault
consummated by battery, and on 25 February 1991 you were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of assault consummated
by battery, assault upon a superior petty officer, and
disrespect.
On 3 March 1991 your commanding officer (CO) initiated
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. In connection with this
processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an
other than honorable discharge and elected to have your case
heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
5 March 1991 the ADB found that you had committed misconduct by
reason of commission of a serious offense, and recommended an
other than honorable discharge. On 25 April 1991 you began a
period of UA. On 2 May 1991 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 8 May 1991 the period of UA ended, but it appears that no
disciplinary action was taken. On 29 May 1991 you were separated
with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct
due to commission of a serious offense.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and the 15 years that has passed since 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 that continued even after you
were warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary
action or an other than honorable discharge. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05741-07
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 | CY2007 | 07864-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2008. 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 | 03117-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. Biter careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02235-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 October 2008. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02082-08
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, on 20 December 1991, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 10277 12
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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your first NUP, that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | 01536-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 2010. Shortly thereafter, you were notified of administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and waived your procedural right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02222-08
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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04122-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2009. 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 8 June 1985, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct due...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12353-08
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 28 December 1992, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of Misconduct due to commission 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...