Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12481-09
Original file (12481-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51300

 

SIN
Docket No: 12481-09
28 January 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 26 January 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

28 August 1986 at age 18. During the period from 5 October 1987
to 21 May 1988, you received three nonjudicial punishments
(NJP’s) for nine days of unauthorized absence {UA), three
instances of disobedience, and larceny. Additionally, you were
counseled and warned after your second NUP that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. On
23 May 1988, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. You waived
your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your
case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB}. Your
commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that you be
discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct. He stated, in part, that you repeatedly demonstrated
your untrustworthiness, lack of motivation, disregard for others,
unwillingness to conform, and could not be trusted in an
environment where trust and teamwork were vital. On 8 June 1988,
the discharge authority directed an other than honorable
discharge by reason of misconduct. On 26 July 1988 you were so
discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, and post-service accomplishments. Nevertheless, the
Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three
NJP's and the fact that you were counseled and warned of the
consequences of further misconduct. Finally, the Board noted
that you waived the right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
retention or a better characterization of service. 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,

W. DEAN PF

Executive Dilré

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06195-09

    Original file (06195-09.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. Additionally, after your second NUP, you were counseled and warned 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 | CY2009 | 03292-09

    Original file (03292-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval “Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 09226-09

    Original file (09226-09.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 May 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 | 01195-10

    Original file (01195-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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 directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01737-80

    Original file (01737-80.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2008. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your misconduct that continued...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05232-07

    Original file (05232-07.rtf) 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.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 4 April 1988 at age 22. You waived your right to consult with counsel,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06180-09

    Original file (06180-09.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 16 November 1987, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct. The discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05830-07

    Original file (05830-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    -A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2008. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03125-09

    Original file (03125-09.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 policiés. On 31 December 1988, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct.