Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06994-07
Original file (06994-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                             2 NAVY ANNEX -
          WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



         TRG
          Docket No: 6994-07
          16 May 2008






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 6 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 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 on 28 September 1988 at age 18. on 10 February 1989 you were dropped from training due to non-academic reasons. Four days later, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a one day period of unauthorized absence. On 18 July 1989 you received another NJP for a five day period of unauthorized absence, sleeping on watch and missing ship’s movement.
Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an administrative discharge by reason of misconduct. In connection with this processing, you elected to waive your right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board. The commanding officer stated in his recommendation for discharge, in part, as follows:




[He] has great difficulty in following rules of acceptable military behavior. . .He has shown no interest in continuing his enlistment in a productive manner, as evidenced by his admission of missing ship’s movement through design...
After review, the discharge authority directed discharge under other than honorable conditions and you were so discharged on 5
 August 1989.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and your contention that you could not cope with being a boiler technician in the Navy. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your disciplinary record and apparent desire for discharge regardless of the consequences. 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,



 ROBERT D. ZSA L MAN
Acting Executive Director



















2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03555-06

    Original file (03555-06.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 22 November 1988 at age 20. On 17 April 1989 you were counseled 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 | CY2002 | 10212-02

    Original file (10212-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2003. 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. Further, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required wher Nevertheless, the Board concluded these On 29 April 1992 your On 4 June 1992 the It further...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11292-07

    Original file (11292-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 27 January 1992 your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05514-07

    Original file (05514-07.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 27 January 1989, you enlisted in the Na~ at age 18. On 30 October 1992, you began another UA and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04869-07

    Original file (04869-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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 | CY2014 | NR1837 14

    Original file (NR1837 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05217 12

    Original file (05217 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 20 March 2013. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • 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 | CY2008 | 00401-08

    Original file (00401-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard...