DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SUN
Docket No: 03323-08
27 February 2009
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 24 February 2009. 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
26 June 1989 at age 18. On 26 December 1990 and 30 April 1992,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 78 days.
On 6 May 1992, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or
have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).
On 19 May 1992, your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct. He stated, in part, that you
were an average performer, had repeated UA'’s, totally disregarded
rules and regulations, and were a burden to the command.
On 28 May and 4 June 1992, you received NUP for UA, disobedience,
wrongful use of a controlled substance, and failure to go to your
appointed place of duty. On 9 June 1992, the discharge authority
directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct. On 12 June 1992 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your four NJP’s, two of which were
imposed after you were recommended for separation. 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,
\ aan’
W. DEAN PFEIL
Executive Diteéc
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07028-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2010 | 04488-10
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. On 30 June 1992, you were so discharged. 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 | 08810-07
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of two NUP’s, one of which was imposed after you were counseled and warned of the consequences of further misconduct, and conviction by SCM for period of UA...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03224-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2013. 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 | CY2008 | 12263-08
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 were advised that you were being administratively separated with .an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct and you waived your procedural right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03175-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 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. On 9 November 1990 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06969-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 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. 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 | CY2009 | 01894-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 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. On 16 April 1993, administrative discharge action was initiated by.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4276 13
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
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...