Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00411-07
Original file (00411-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100





 SMW
 Docket No: 411-07
12 July 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 11 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 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 31 May 1984 you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. On
 25 September 1984 you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that ended on 1 May 1985, a period of about 218 days. On 8 July 1985 you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of the 218-day period of UA. On 26 August 1985 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a brief period of UA. 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. On 1 November 1985 you received NJP for disobedience of a lawful order.
Based on the information currently contained in your record, it appears that your commanding officer (CO) initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement. In connection with this processing, on 16 December 1985 you acknowledged that the separation could result in an other than honorable discharge and elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Apparently, an ADB found that you had committed misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement and recommended an other than
 honorable discharge. On 2 March 1986 the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement. On 17 March 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 of not being the only individual involved in an aircraft mishap. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your misconduct that included more than six months of UA and continued even after you were warned that further infractions could result in an other than honorable discharge. Regarding your contention, there is no evidence in the record to show that you were discharged because of one incident. 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01710-09

    Original file (01710-09.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 19 February 1986 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 21 February 1986, you were so discharged. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend yourself...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05427-07

    Original file (05427-07.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 15 October 1981, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent. In connection with this...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3531-13

    Original file (NR3531-13.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. After waiving your procedural right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB) your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to frequent - involvement of a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08967-06

    Original file (08967-06.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 8 June 1982 you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. On 25 June 1984 you received NJP for these two...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12555 11

    Original file (12555 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 2 October 2012. Documentary material considered by +he 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 | 12516 11

    Original file (12516 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2012. During the period from 9 January to 31 July 1986 you received NUP on two more occasions for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and impersonating a petty officer to gain entrance to an Army noncommissioned officer's club. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09332-06

    Original file (09332-06.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 in] ustice.On 28 January 1983 you enlisted in the Navy at age 21. During the period from 21 February 1984 to 22...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04514-09

    Original file (04514-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2010. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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 | CY2008 | 06863-08

    Original file (06863-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 April 2009. The discharge authority then directed discharge under other than honorable conditions 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 | 01905-07

    Original file (01905-07.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 9 July 1976, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. On 1 May 1979, in connection with the...