DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SUN
Docket No: 11876-08
29 October 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 exécutive session, considered your.
application on 27 October 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
14 March 1988 at age 18. You served for about two years until
17 March 1990, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 24 days, and
missing movement.
On 9 July 1990, you were the subject of a psychiatric evaluation
after making a statement that you would kill yourself if you had
to go back to work on the ship. At the time, you were pending
your second NJP. You were diagnosed with a personality disorder
(passive/aggressive} manifested by pervasive anger and.
mMalingering. The report further found you fully accountable for
your actions. On 19 July 1990, you received a second NUP for 32
days of UA and missing movement. You received restriction, extra
duties, a reduction in paygrade, and a letter of reprimand.
On 18 July 1990, 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 board (ADB).
On 20 July 1990, your commanding officer recommended discharge by
reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of under
other than honorable conditions. He stated, in part, that you
were given an opportunity to conform your behavior to the
required standards. You were discharged under other than
honorable conditions on 30 July 1990.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service, and current medical problems. Nevertheless,
the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your two NUP’s for
very serious offenses. The Board found that you waived your
right to an ADB, your best opportunity 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02121-09
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. On 27 August 1990, you received NUP for being UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03201-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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 | 03595-09
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. On 28 November 1990, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, You waived your rights to consuit counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12050 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
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 | CY2011 | 04469-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03813-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 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. On 22 January 1990, you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02193-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 January 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 | 00477 12
On 4 May 1990, you were UA for three days, with no disciplinary action taken. On 5 September and 1 October 1990, you were UA one day each, and no disciplinary action was taken against you. On 8 July 1991, you were UA again for one day and no disciplinary action was taken.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07965-08
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. Additionally, 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.