DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 8758-09
16 June 2010
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 15 June 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 ali
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 11 April 2000 at age 23 and served
without disciplinary incident until 24 June 2002, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for eight periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 90 days, failure to go to your
appointed place of duty, two specifications of missing the
movement of your ship, dereliction of duty, and assault.
Subsequentiy, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. After waiving your procedural rights, your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of
a serious offense. On 1 July 2002 the discharge authority
approved this recommendation and directed your commanding .officer
to discharge you under other than honorable conditions by reason
of misconduct, and on 9 July 2002, you were SO discharged.
+
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which
included a lengthy period of UA from the Navy. Finally, you were
given an opportunity to defend yourself and possibly obtain a
better characterization of service, but waived your procedural
rights. 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,
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07403-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 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. After waiving your procedural rights to consulting with legal counsel and present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02315-09
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 25 May 1993 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by the two periods of UA totalling 66 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02393-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05767-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on i8 May 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 4 February 1992 you were again convicted by SCM of a 28 day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08749-09
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. 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 of injustice. After waiving your procedural rights, your commanding officer recommended discharge under other...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03384-09
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 20 August 1984, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07274-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. 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 | 07274-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. 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 | 01610-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 2010. After waiving your procedural rights, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and on 18 April 1990, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04167-09
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 24 June 1986, administrative discharge action was imitiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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...