DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 7006-07
13 May 2008
your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552.
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.
Co establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 1 April 1987 at age 18 and served for
10 months without disciplinary incident. However, during the
period from 19 February to 17 September 1987 you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for two periods of
absence from your appointed place of duty, two specifications of
failure to obey a lawful order, two specifications of assault,
one of which was with a dangerous weapon, insubordination, and
two specifications of misbehavior as sentinel.
On 11 February 1988 you received NJP for a 39 day period of
authorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction and extra
duty for 30 days, a $376.35 forfeiture of pay, and detention of
$100. Shortly thereafter, on 24 February 1988, 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).
The next day, on 25 February 1988, you received your sixth NJP
for two specifications of disobedience and malingering. The
punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty forf 10 days.
On 29 February 1988 your commanding officer recommended
separation under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due
to commission of a serious offense. Subsequently, on 22 March
1988, the discharge authority directed discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 5 April 1988
you were so separated.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and assertion that you were told that your discharge
could be upgraded so that you could obtain veterans’ benefits.
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 six NUPs. Further, no discharge is automatically
upgraded due solely to the passage of time. Finally, you were
given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your
procedural right to present your case to an ADB and perhaps
obtain a better characterization of service. 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,
Reena eS
/
ROBERT D»’*ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08188-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2008. On 18 August 1988 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for five periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $670 forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 45 days. 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 | 05571-06
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 | CY2001 | 06248-01
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 27 January 1988 you received NJP for wrongful consumption of alcohol beverages as a minor and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days and reduction to paygrade E-l. On 3 February 1988 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02392-09
RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2010. Documentary material congidered 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 23 March 1988 you received NUP for two periods of UA totalling two days, failure to obey a lawful order, and four periods of absence from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1624-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 January 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. 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
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 | CY2006 | 02782-06
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 1 April 1987 after three years of prior honorable service. You were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07698-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. 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 | 08132-07
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, your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08559-98
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...