DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
' ; WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 10843-08
19 January 2010
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 6 January 2010. 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.
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 26 May 1989.
A general court-martial convened on i2 April 1993 and found you
‘guilty of wrongful appropriation of $1353.60 in United States
Government funds. The court sentenced you to confinement for’
ninety days, forfeiture of $250.00 pay per month for three
months, and reduction in pay grade.
On 22 June 1993 an administrative discharge board (ADB)
recommended that you be separated with a discharge under other
-than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the
commission of a serious offense. After review by the discharge
authority the recommendation was sent to the Secretary of the
Navy for approval. Upon approval, you were discharged on 2
November 1993 with a discharge under other than honorable
conditions.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record, and the contention that you should have received a
general discharge since the general court-martial did not
discharge you. The Board concluded that those factors were
insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge,
given the serious nature of your misconduct. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is régretted 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 Dinevtor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04178-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2012. 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 | 03375-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2010. You received the BCD after appellate review was completed. 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 | 00934-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2010. 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 | 11349-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2010. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in a SCM and a SPCM conviction. ponsequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval “record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the fprtstence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11596-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 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 10 August 1993, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03101-09
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. Administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you by reason of misconduct. You were so discharged on 4 July 1994, The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and overall record of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00561-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2010. Subsequently, your case was forwarded, and on 14 June 1994, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for an OTH discharge. “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 | 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 | CY2009 | 02203-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with aii 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10742-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. However, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this period of UA. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010.