Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00131-10
Original file (00131-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SUN
Docket No: 00131-10
12 October 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 5 October 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 October 1987. The Board found that you received four
nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for disobedience, four instances
of assault, a breach of the peace, unauthorized absence, four
instances of disrespect, and uttering insufficient funds checks.
Additionally you were counseled and warned after your second NUP,
that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge
action. Subsequently, 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 case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged
under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of
misconduct. The discharge authority concurred and directed an
OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to pattern of
misconduct. You were so discharged on 11 April 1991.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, and post-service diagnosis of an adjustment disorder.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your four NUJP’s, two of which were imposed after you were
counseled and warned concerning the consequences of further
misconduct. Further, 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 of the members of the panel
will be furnished Sifon request.

Saag, Sea 0:

ft is regr@tted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the
foard reconsidéet 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,

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2009 | 10364-09

    Original file (10364-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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 | 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 | 10943-09

    Original file (10943-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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 | 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 | 04685-09

    Original file (04685-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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. On 19 December 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit and dereliction of duty.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03358-09

    Original file (03358-09.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. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07015-09

    Original file (07015-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 3 May 1984 you were so discharged. 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 | CY2012 | 01322 12

    Original file (01322 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2012. 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 19 October 1990, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02177-08

    Original file (02177-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 October 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. On 10 May 1985, you were so discharged.