Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05799-10
Original file (05799-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

REC
Docket No: 05799-10
10 March 2011

 

This ig 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 9 March 2011. 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 on 18 March 1983. On 30 June 1983, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disrespect to a petty
officer, and failure to obey a lawful order. On 3 October 1983,
you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of stealing
$62 from a fellow Sailor. You were sentenced to forfeitures of
$750, reduction in pay grade, and confinement at hard labor for
75 days. On 12 October 1983, administrative separation action
was initiated by reason of misconduct (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). On 31 October 1983, your commanding officer
Forwarded his recommendation that you be discharged under other
than honorable conditions (OTH) by reason of misconduct. On

16 November 1983, the discharge authority directed an OTH
discharge by reason of misconduct (commission of a serious
offense). On 8 December 1983, you were So discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge, given your record of one NJP and one
conviction by a SPCM of misconduct. The Board noted that you
waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention
or a more favorable characterization of service. Accordingly,
your application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

* It is regrette@ that the circumstances of your case are such that

avorable actiow’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,

\Qund

W. DEAN P ]
Executive \Dik&ctor

/

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08010-10

    Original file (08010-10.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. 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 | CY2008 | 12365-08

    Original file (12365-08.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. On 23 March 1985, administrative discharge action was initiated 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR00268 13

    Original file (NR00268 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ‘ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01614-11

    Original file (01614-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 duly 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. On 3 December 1992, your commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that you be discharged with an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02245-11

    Original file (02245-11.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. The Board did-not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12453-10

    Original file (12453-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 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 | CY2010 | 04633-10

    Original file (04633-10.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 January 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 04201-09

    Original file (04201-09.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 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 16 April 1987, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8690 13

    Original file (NR8690 13.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 September 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. On 25 January 1989, the ADB found that you committed misconduct (commission of a serious offense) and recommended that you be separated with an...