DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
RDZ:ecb
Docket No. 10261-07
30 July 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 22 July 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 23 July 1986 at age 18. On 20 May
1988 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUJP) for theft of
three bottles of perfume. You were reduced in rank, ordered to
forfeit $376 for two months, ordered to be restrictea and to
perform extra duty for 25 days and you were warned that further
misconduct could result in administrative separation with an
other than honorable (OTH) discharge. On 28 March 1989 you
received your second NUP for theft of an ATM card and assaulting
a petty officer. Because of these disciplinary infractions you
appeared before an administrative discharge board (ADB).
Although the ADB found that you had committed serious misconduct
it decided not to discharge you and gave you one more
opportunity to complete your enlistment in an honorable manner.
Unfortunately you failed to take advantage of this opportunity
by your continued misconduct. Specifically you received your
third NJP on 14 December 1989 for theft of a leather jacket, two
barber clippers, two hair cutting shears and carrying a
concealed pistol. Consequently your commanding officer
recommended you for an OTH discharge. On 20 December 1989 you
waived your right to an ADB and agreed to accept an OTH
discharge which you received on 31 January 1990.
In its review of your application the Board carefully took into
account all matters in extenuation and mitigation such as your
youth at the time you committed your offenses as well as the
letters you attached to your application attesting to your post
service conduct. Nevertheless in view of your repeated acts of
serious misconduct which occurred after several warnings of the
consequences of such actions, the Board concluded that your
discharge was proper as issued and should not be changed now as
a matter of clemency.
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 PF
Executive DiyetNor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 102261-07
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.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 23 July 1986 at age 18. On 28 March 1989 you received your second NJP...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01737-80
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 | CY2008 | 02844-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2008. In accordance with applicable Navy regulations your commanding officer transmitted the results of the ADB proceedings to the Commander, Naval Military Personnel Command (NMPC) urging that the ADB’s recommendation for retention be disapproved and that you be discharged, but because of the recommendation for retention, that you receive a general...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07445-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 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. On 14 May 1990, you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10247-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 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. On 1i.September 1989, you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12084-10
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, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to the civil conviction. 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 | 06046-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...
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 | 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 | 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...