Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09291-09
Original file (09291-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-8100

 

BAN
Docket No: 09291-09
6 July 2010 ,

 

Dear saaMRenalller

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 3 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 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 entered active duty in the Navy on 27 January 1986, and
served without disciplinary incident until 27 July 1987, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for two specifications of
provoking speech or gesture. Shortiy thereafter, you received
the following NUP’s: on 14 September 1988, for disobeying a
lawful order, and use of reproachful words toward personal
support detachment. personnel; on 11 April 1989, for wrongfully
possessing a liberty pass without authorization; and on 24 July
1989, for wrongful appropriation of a stereo. Therefore, you
were recommended for separation due to your pattern of
misconduct. You waived all of -your procedural rights, including
your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). The
separation authority approved the recommendation for an other
_than honorable (OTH) discharge. On 14 November 1989, you were

separated with an OTH discharge and 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 and the passage of time. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing
the characterization of your discharge due to your pattern of
misconduct. Furthermore, the Board found you waived your right
to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Finally, there is no provision of
law or in regulations that allow 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,

\ oon f

W. DEAN PFEIE®F
Executive Dirac

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05735-09

    Original file (05735-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 noted you were counseled and warned after your first NUP, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05160-09

    Original file (05160-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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 | CY2009 | 12619-09

    Original file (12619-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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. Therefore, you were recommended for separation due to drug abuse.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07257-09

    Original file (07257-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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. 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 | 10658-09

    Original file (10658-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. 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 | 11205-09

    Original file (11205-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 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 | 01683-10

    Original file (01683-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. However, while waiting to be separated from naval service, you went UA and continued in a UA status until you were discharged in absentia on 12 July 1991, with an OTH discharge and an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code due to a pattern of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03156-09

    Original file (03156-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2010. 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 initially enlisted in the Air Force from July 1972 to April 1974, and received an honorable discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00094-09

    Original file (00094-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13188-09

    Original file (13188-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...