DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 4201-09
8 March 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
late husband's 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 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 late husband’s 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.
Your late husband enlisted in the Navy and began a period of
active duty on 22 September 1983 at age 19. On 20 January 1987,
he was convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of an 84 day
_period of unauthorized absence (UA) from his unit. On 16 April
1987, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. He waived his
rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have his case
heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 28 April
1987, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a 33 day period
of UA from his unit. On 6 May 1987, his commanding officer
forwarded the recommendation that your late husband be discharged
under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of
misconduct. On 22 May 1987, the separation authority directed an
OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. On 2 June 1987 he was so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your late husband’s
youth and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of his discharge given the seriousness of his
misconduct. Finally, the Board noted that your late husband
waived the right to an ADB, his 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,
W. DEAN PF
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08496-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 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 ali material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05053-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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 29 October 1987, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10516-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2010. 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 00361-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your son’s 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 | CY2012 | 05267-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 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. You elected to consult counsel and have your case heard before an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1624-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 January 2014. 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 | CY2008 | 06046-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02730-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05584-07
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. During the period 22 November to 22 December 1986, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for about 30 days. 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.