Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11744-09
Original file (11744-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SON

Docket No: 11744-09
11 August 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 10 August 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 enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on

i July 1991. The Board found that on 22 October 1992, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence,
aggravated assault, and drunk and disorderly conduct.
Subsequently, 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). Your
case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under
other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. The
discharge authority concurred and directed an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of
a serious offense. On 2 December 1992, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your NUP for serious offenses. 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 ef the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

tt 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.
wen this regard, it is. important to keep in mind that a
mecsumption.of ‘reguldrity attaches to all official records.
enseguent ly, .when. aBplying for a correction of an official naval
ecord, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the

pe uence of. probable material error or injustice.

sot

   
  

Sincerely,

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05767-09

    Original file (05767-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 04481-09

    Original file (04481-09.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. On 3 June 1992, the separation authority directed an other than honorable discharge 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01584-10

    Original file (01584-10.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. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend your actions, but waived your procedural ‘yight to present your case to an 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04677-09

    Original file (04677-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 | 00271-10

    Original file (00271-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 2010. the Board did not;consider whether to upgrade your discharge or Change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and 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 burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03982-09

    Original file (03982-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2010. On 28 July 1992 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and 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 injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01567-10

    Original file (01567-10.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. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09595-09

    Original file (09595-09.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. After waiving your procedural rights to legal counsel and an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended discharge...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02315-09

    Original file (02315-09.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. 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 | CY2010 | 00394-10

    Original file (00394-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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