DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TAL
Docket No: 5281-09
31 January 2011
This is in reference 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 26 January 2011. 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 and began a period of active duty on
4 March 1980 at age 17. You received nonjudicial punishment
(NIP) on eight occasions for two instances of unauthorized
absence (UA) from your unit, two instances of failure to obey a
lawful order, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline,
failure to go to your appointed place of duty, wrongfully
appearing in an unclean uniform, wrongful possession and use of
marijuana, destruction of government property, two instances of
signing a false official document, and disrespect in language and
deportment toward a superior noncommissioned officer. You were
counseled on several occasions regarding your misconduct and
warned that further offenses could result in administrative
separation. On 13 July 1983, you were notified of pending
administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable
(OTH) discharge due to misconduct (frequent involvement). After
consulting with legal counsel, you elected to present your case
to an administrative discharge board (ADB). The ADB found that
you committed misconduct and recommended that you be separated
with an OTH discharge. On 12 August 1983, you again received NUP
for damage to government property. On 28 August 1983, the
separation authority agreed with the recommendation of the ADB
and directed your commanding officer to issue you an OTH
discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement,
and on 1 September 1983, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
youth and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of
your misconduct that resulted in nine NJPs. Finally, there is no
provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for
recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time.
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,
\ ene
W. DEAN P
Executive rettor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5901 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 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 | CY2013 | NR6780 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 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 | CY2010 | 04288-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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 | CY2011 | 00154-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2011. Rfter 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 | CY2010 | 07317-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 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 | CY2011 | 04856-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3860-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval _ Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ; application on 19 March 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05700-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 2011. On 6 April 1973, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two instances of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period totaling 141 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR287 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 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. Conseguently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...