Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00623-10
Original file (00623-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

BAN
Docket No: 00623-10
25 October 2010

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10, 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 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 entered active duty in the Navy in 23 April 1991, and served
without disciplinary incident until 5 March 1992, when you
received nonjudicial punishment for making a false official
statement with intent to deceive. Shortly thereafter you
committed a serious offense (COSO). Your record is incomplete,
but it appears that you were recommended for separation with a
other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to a COSO and alcohol
rehabilitation failure by refusing to attend Level III treatment.
You waived your rights to consult with counsel and an
administrative discharge board (ADB). The separation authority
approved the recommendation and on 6 August 1991, you were
separated with an OTH discharge due to a COSO and assigned an RE-
4 reenlistment code.

 

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, and post service good conduct. Nevertheless, the

Board concluded these factors were not

sufficient to warrant

recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness

of your misconduct. Additionally, the

waived your procedural right to an ADB,

retention or a better characterization
your application has been denied. The
members of the panel will be furnished

It is regretted that the circumstances
favorable action cannot be taken. You

Board found that you

your best opportunity for
of service. Accordingly,
names and votes of the
upon request.

of your case are such that
are entitled to have the

Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence.or otherfmatter not previously considered by the Board.
fn this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
‘oresumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval

recomp;. the burden is on the applicant

to demonstrate the

existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

Wo Rea

 

hee

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12250 11

    Original file (12250 11.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 November 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge due to your COSO: Furthermore, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08760-08

    Original file (08760-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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 material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12640-09

    Original file (12640-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2010. You waived all of your procedural rights, including your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | 10195-10

    Original file (10195-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 June 2011. Your commanding officer agreed with the ADB’s finding and recommendation, and on 4 March 2010, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service due to misconduct {COSO) , and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03552 12

    Original file (03552 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 20 March 2013. 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 ADB voted to separate you with an OTH discharge due to misconduct (COSO).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10909-09

    Original file (10909-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2010 | 01687-10

    Original file (01687-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 ADB found you had committed misconduct but recommended that you be separated with a general discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08617-10

    Original file (08617-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11995-10

    Original file (11995-10.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. 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 had prior honorable service in the Navy from 1978 to 1983. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 02314-12

    Original file (02314-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2013. 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...