Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10915-09
Original file (10915-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 10915-09
14 July 2010

 

This is 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 13 July 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Navy on 21 October 1986. You received nonjudicial
punishment on five occasions for unauthorized absence, absence
from your appointed place of duty (three specifications),
disrespect toward a petty officer, dereliction of duty, and
breaking restriction (14 specifications). You were notified of
pending administrative separation processing with an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (pattern of
misconduct). You elected to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB), which met and found that
you had committed misconduct (pattern of misconduct) and
recommended your separation with an OTH discharge. The
discharge authority concurred with the ADB’s finding and
recommendation, and you were so discharged on 16 September
1988, and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
desire to upgrade your discharge. However, the Board concluded
that your OTH discharge should not be changed due to your
numerous acts of misconduct. In view of the above, 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,

\ Qua Seh.

W. DEAN PF
Executive D or

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01760-10

    Original file (01760-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12689-09

    Original file (12689-09.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. 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 | CY2010 | 00329-10

    Original file (00329-10.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 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. The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 7 September 1990, after more than nine years of honorable service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03551-09

    Original file (03551-09.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. 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 00960-10

    Original file (00960-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12582-09

    Original file (12582-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 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 | CY2010 | 00982-10

    Original file (00982-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10207-09

    Original file (10207-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06756-09

    Original file (06756-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...