Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08188-07
Original file (08188-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 8188-07
9 October 2008

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 8 October 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 15 January 1987 at age 17
and began a period of active duty on 14 September 1987. Your
Student evaluation record reflects that during the period from 16
December 1987 to 23 August 1988 you committed multiple
disciplinary infractions. However, the record also reflects that
no disciplinary action was taken for this misconduct.

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. About two months later, on 24 October 1988,
you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of four
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order and breaking
restriction. You were sentenced to confinement for 20 days anda
$447 forfeiture of pay.
Subsequently, on 10 January 1989, you were notified of pending
administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. After consulting with legal
counsel you elected to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 21 March 1989 an ADB recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 19 April
1989 your commanding officer also recommended an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of
a serious offense. On 24 May 1989 the discharge authority
approved these recommendations, and on 26 May 1989, 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 and desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive
misconduct. 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,

Ly .

W. DEAN E
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01737-80

    Original file (01737-80.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 October 2008. 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 recharacterization of your discharge due to your misconduct that continued...

  • 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 | CY1999 | 08559-98

    Original file (08559-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07006-07

    Original file (07006-07.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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06169-10

    Original file (06169-10.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 1990 an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05571-06

    Original file (05571-06.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 Naval Reserve on 7 February 1987 and began a period of active duty on 11 February...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02392-09

    Original file (02392-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (NR1624-13.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 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

    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 | CY2005 | 07467-05

    Original file (07467-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2006. 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...