DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SIN
Docket No: 00913-10
20 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 19 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
4 September 1991. The Board found that 30 June and 19 July 1993,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for four periods of
unauthorized absence, four instances of failure to go to your
appointed place of duty, and dereliction of duty. Additionally,
you were counseled and warned after your first NUP that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 commission of a serious offense.
You were so discharged on 3 September 1993.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, post service accomplishments, and character letters.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your two NJP’s for serious offenses, 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 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
“epon request. — .
Meds 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,
\gy Doand |
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dive x
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12399-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2009. On 17 June 1993, the discharge authority 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 | 04677-09
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 | CY2009 | 12807-09
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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your third NUP, that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6679 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 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. 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 | 03443-09
Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 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. Subsequently, your commanding officer concurred with the ADB and forwarded your case to the discharge authority for review.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11973-10
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
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 | CY2010 | 06407-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. 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 | 03595-09
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 28 November 1990, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, You waived your rights to consuit counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08884-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2011. 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...