DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 4567-09
26 March 2010
This ig 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 17 March 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
iniustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 29
August 1986 at age 22. On 4 June 1980, you were convicted by
special court-martial (SPCM) for two instances of unauthorized
absence (UA) from your unit totaling a period of 182 days. On 27
June 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 discharge board (ADB). On 27 June
1990, your commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that
you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions due
to commission of a serious offense. On 19 July 1990, the
separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 26 July
1990 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service and the character letters accompanying your
application. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct. You are
advised that no discharge is automatically upgraded due to the
passage of time or an individual’s good behavior after discharge.
Finally, the Board noted that you waived the right to an ADB,
your 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,
\oWans
W. DEAN PF
Executive D tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01650-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2010. You elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which met and found that you had committed misconduct (commission of a serious offense), but recommended that you receive a general discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06050-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 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. 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 | 01582-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 2008. 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 connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and elected to have your case heard by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02245-11
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 Board did-not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
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 | CY2009 | 08122-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 2010. You elected to have your case heard by 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 | CY2011 | 02220-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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. On 30 July 1990, the ADB recommended separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12807-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your third NUP, that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09759-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 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 2 November 1990, you were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01271-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 2010. You elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which met and found that you had ‘committed misconduct (commission of a serious offense), but recommended that you be retained. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...