DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 345-10
22 September 2010
eee ee
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 21 September 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 reenlisted in the
Navy on 19 March 1984, after more than three years of honorable
service. During your final enlistment, you were convicted ata
special court-martial of making a false official statement,
wrongfully subscribing under oath a false statement, and
wrongful cohabitation in government housing with a woman who
was not your wife. You were notified that your commanding
officer was recommending you for administrative separation with
an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct
(commission of a serious offense. You waived all of your
procedural rights, including your right to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 6 May 1985, you received an OTH
discharge due to misconduct (commission of a serious offense),
and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention)
reenlistment code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, prior
honorable service, and the results of a case with Similar facts
as yours. However, the Board concluded that your discharge
should not be changed due to your misconduct. The Board found
., that you watved your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
} retention or a better characterization of service. The also
‘Board found that the Navy commander who committed misconduct
@imilar to yours’ was very fortunate to have been retained on
active duty. 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
thaveséeverable-«aation 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
in| wstiee:.
Sincerely,
Pp
Executive Dh tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00271-10
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 | 10909-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 July 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 | CY2009 | 07263-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 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. You were recommended for separation due to your commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00102-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. It was recommended that you be retained on active duty and warned that further misconduct of drug use could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10524-09
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 9 September 1987, you were notified that your commanding officer was recommending you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (commission of a serious offense). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04469-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7400 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2014. 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 | 10246-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2010. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH 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 probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11373-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 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. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct due to commission...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10516-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 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.