DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 1742-09
11 January 2010
This is in referencé 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 5 January 2010. The names and votes~of the:
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 26 August 1985 at age 17 and
immediately began a period of active duty. You served without
disciplinary incident until 17 April 1987, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for disobedience. The punishment
imposed was a $369 forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty
for 30 days, and reduction to paygrade E-1. On 22 May and again
on 1 June 1987 you received NUP for disorderly conduct,
disobedience, and destruction of government property.
On 12 June 1987 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
“misconduct. At that time you waived your right to consult with
degal counsel and to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 24 June 1987 your commanding officer
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Shortly
thereafter, on 16 July 1987, the discharge authority approved
this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue
you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct,
and on 22 July 1987, you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and desire to upgrade your
discharge and change the narrative reason for separation and the
reenlistment code. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge or to change the narrative reason for separation or
reenlistment code because of the seriousness of your repetitive
misconduct which resulted in three NUJPs. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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,
\SagenS the
Executive ctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00657-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2007. 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 concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason for discharge, reenlistment code or...
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 | CY1998 | NC9808767
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 1999. 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 | 02392-09
RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2010. Documentary material congidered 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 March 1988 you received NUP for two periods of UA totalling two days, failure to obey a lawful order, and four periods of absence from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09771-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 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. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reenlistment code based on your circumstances.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03149-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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 10 December 1986, you were counseled regarding your unacceptable performance, psychiatric diagnosis, advised where assistance was available, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00131-10
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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to 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 | CY2008 | 10503-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned, after your First NUP, that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12481-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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. On 8 June 1988, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.
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.