Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11945-09
Original file (11945-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5700

 

BUG
Docket No: 11945-09
12 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 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 23 January 1978. You received nonjudicial
punishment and were convicted by a summary court-martial. Your
offenses included wearing civilian clothes while on
restriction, failing to muster for restriction, and a 60 day
period of unauthorized absence. You were notified that your
commanding officer was recommending you for administrative

separation with a type of characterization warranted by your
service record due to unsuitability. You waived all of your
procedural rights, including your right to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 21 August 1978, you received a
general discharge due to unsuitablity, and were assigned an RE-
4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code.

4
Characterization of service is based in part on trait marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your overall trait average was

1.9. A 3.0 overall trait average was required for a fully
honorable discharge.

In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
gpllegation of “sexual trauma.” However, the Board concluded
@that your discharge should not be changed because of your
misconduct and insufficiently high overall trait average. The
Board found that you waived your right to an ADB, your best
opportunity for retention or a better characterization of
service. The Board concluded that you were fortunate to
receive a general characterization of service, because
individuals who are separated for misconduct such as yours
normally receive an other than honorable discharge. Regarding
Frour allegatign, the Board found no evidence in your record to
support it, and noted that you provided no such evidence. 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,

ons

W. DEAN F

Executive\Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10855-08

    Original file (10855-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of .Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 2009. 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. 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 | CY2008 | 08848-08

    Original file (08848-08.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 2009. 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 | 12014-10

    Original file (12014-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2011. 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 administrative separation with a general discharge due to unsuitability.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07802-07

    Original file (07802-07.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the RE-4 reenlistment code or recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct. Furthermore, regulations do not require a second urinalysis to discharge a member by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00189-10

    Original file (00189-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive séssion, considered your ; application on 12 January 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 | CY2002 | 08750-02

    Original file (08750-02.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 June 2002. 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. Nevertheless, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02818-09

    Original file (02818-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 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 | CY2009 | 09511-09

    Original file (09511-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3140-13

    Original file (NR3140-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2014. On 14 July 1978 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of unsuitability, and on 21 July 1978, you were so separated. -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 | CY2007 | 10460-07

    Original file (10460-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You then served in the Navy Reserve until 14 September 1991, when you were honorably discharged from the service and not recommended for reenlistment pursuant to the approved findings of an administrative discharge board (ADB). You completed reports of medical history on those dates in which you falsely denied that you had ever been discharged from military service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...