Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00346-10
Original file (00346-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 346-10
22 September 2010

SE .

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 entered active
duty in the Navy on 12 September 1990. You received
nonjudicial punishment for larceny of another Sailor’s sea bag,
drunk and disorderly conduct, and being incapacitated for the
performance of your duties. On 28 January 1992, you were
admitted to a mental health unit for homicidal ideation. You
were diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed emotional
features and a passive-aggressive personality disorder with
antisocial features. 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 misconduct (commission of a serious offense). You waived
all of your procedural rights, including your Fight to ar
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 18 March 1992, you
received a general discharge due to misconduct (commission of
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, mental
health issues, and post service good conduct. However, the
iBoard ‘concludéd tat our discharge should not be changed
_becatise of "your misconduct. The Board found that you waived
‘your right’tS ah 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. In view of the above, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will
‘be furnished tiper 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,

\ Donde!

W. DEAN PF
Executive rector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02610-08

    Original file (02610-08.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01637-10

    Original file (01637-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BJG Docket No: 1637-10 26 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 26 October 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04481-09

    Original file (04481-09.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 3 June 1992, the separation authority directed an other than honorable 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09097-06

    Original file (09097-06.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you served active duty in the US Army from 6 August 1985 to 21 November 1991,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00394-10

    Original file (00394-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 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 | CY2014 | NR1004 14

    Original file (NR1004 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A. three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. 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 so ‘discharge on 10 November 1992. : The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11744-09

    Original file (11744-09.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 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04677-09

    Original file (04677-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1004 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR1004 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. 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, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11689-10

    Original file (11689-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 201i. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), on 3 July 1992, your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...