DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 08918-08
13 July 2009
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 July 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 on 25 Jun 1984, and served without
disciplinary incident until 29 Aug 1986, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUJP) for assault. Shortly thereafter, on
25 February 1987, you received another NJP for assault and
unauthorized absence, in excess of 21 days. You requested and
received an administrative discharge board, which found
misconduct and voted to separate you from naval service with an
other than honorable (OTH) discharge. Therefore, on 16 June
1987, you were separated with an OTH discharge and an RE-4
reenlistment code due to your misconduct.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, belief that enough time has elapsed to warrant ~.
upgrading your discharge and personal references, including your
‘ex-wife. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your
discharge due to your misconduct. Further, there is no provision
in the law or regulations that allows for recharacterization of
service due solely to the passage of time. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05965-08
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 | CY2008 | 09302-08
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 waived your right to 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 | CY2009 | 01492-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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. Therefore, on 12 November 1987, you were separated with an OTH discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01375-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2013 | NR2433-13
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 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 | CY2010 | 02832-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2012 | 03530-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2013. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02874-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 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, After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03801-09
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. On 10 April 1987, you were notified of your commanding officer's (CO’s) recommendation that you receive administrative separation processing for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...