DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 11791-09
8 July 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 7 July 2010. ‘The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furpished 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 on 17 July 1998 at age 17. You served
without disciplinary infraction until 11 January 1999, when you
began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) and missed the
movement of your ship. As a result, on 26 March 1999, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a 70 day period of UA
and four specifications of missing ship’s movement. About four
months later, on 1 July 1999, you received NUP for failure to go
to your appointed place of duty.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After
waiving your procedural rights, the discharge authority directed
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and on 30 July 1999,
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, personal statement, police
report, desire to upgrade your discharge, and assertions of
impaired abilities to serve and personal problems. It also
considered the character reference letters and college documents
provided in support of your case. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your misconduct, which included a lengthy period of UA ina
short term of service and resulted in two NUPs. Finally, you
were given an opportunity to defend yourself, 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,
Leu
W. DEAN PFERYF
Executive Dire
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07289-09
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 or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07289-09
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 or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11249-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 | CY2010 | 00449-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. However, on 15 April 1971, you received your fourth NUP for being in a UA status.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11653-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 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...
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 | CY2009 | 10658-09
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 | 10692-09
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 23 August 2005 you were again UA from your unit. 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 | CY2009 | 04679-09
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...