DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG
Docket No: 10970-07
11 August 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 5 August 2008. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
together with all material submitted in support
regulations
Board.
your application,
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
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 20 January 1991 at age 18. A special
court-martial convened on 24 April 1992 and convicted you of two
periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 43 days and
missing ship's movement on two occasions. The court sentenced
you to forfeitures of pay, reduction in rate and 30 days
confinement at hard labor.
Subsequently you were processed for an administrative discharge
by reason of misconduct due to your commission of a serious
offense. In connection with this processing, you elected to
waive the right to have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board and stated that you did not object to separation.
After review, the discharge authority directed discharge under
other than honorable conditions and you were so discharged on 4
September 1992.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
contention, in effect, that you believed that your discharge
would be upgraded after the passage of a period of time. The
Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient
to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your
conviction by a special court-martial of serious offenses. There
is no provision in the law or regulations which would allow for
recharacterization of a discharge based solely on the passage of
a period of time. 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 SP
Executive Di ¢
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01582-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and elected to have your case heard by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09728-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2008. On 1 May 1992, administrative discharge action was initiated 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00692-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2002. 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 together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, Your allegations of error and After careful and conscientious consideration of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02610-08
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2728-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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 | CY2007 | 07743-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval re ord, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. At Ithat time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel an to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB)| On 15 April...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02341-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2008. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your disciplinary record and especially your conviction by a special court-martial 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 | CY2001 | 00477-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2001. 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. present your case...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06715-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. Based on your conviction by civil authorities, you were processed for an administrative separation from the Navy.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06352-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 2011. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated 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 material error or injustice.