Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00079-08
Original file (00079-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SIN
Docket No: 00079-08
1i December 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 9 December 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on
21 June 1982 at age 18. During the period from 1 February 1983
to 16 June 1984, you received four nonjudicial punishments
(NUP’s) for two instances of assault, drunk and disorderly
conduct, larceny, two periods of unauthorized absence (UA)
totaling four days, missing movement, and disorderly conduct.
Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

On 16 June 1984, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. You waived your right to consult with counsel,
submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board (ADB).

On 5 July 1984, your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct.. On 13 July 1984, the
discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by
reason of misconduct. On 24 July 1984 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service, and character letters accompanying your
application. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given your record of four NUJP’s and the fact that you
were counseled and warned concerning the consequences of further
misconduct. Further, you waived the right to an ADB, your best
chance for retention or 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09753-07

    Original file (09753-07.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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | CY2007 | 05948-07

    Original file (05948-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 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. You were so discharged on 3 July 1984.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08389-07

    Original file (08389-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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. 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 | 08389-07

    Original file (08389-07.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 29 May 1979 at age 18. You were so discharged on 9 February 1984.The...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08887-10

    Original file (08887-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 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 | CY2007 | 04193-07

    Original file (04193-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 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 found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00260-09

    Original file (00260-09.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 23 April 1986, administrative discharge action was initiated 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 probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02439-09

    Original file (02439-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A ches tietiber panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 12 January 2010. 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 | CY2007 | 06294-07

    Original file (06294-07.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 6 January 1992 at age 18. Additionally, you were counseled and warned...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09074-07

    Original file (09074-07.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 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...