DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUJR
Docket No: 6169-10
8 April 2011
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 5 April 2011. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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
InjUst.Lee.
You enlisted in the Navy on 29 October 1987 at age 18 and
immediately began a period of active duty. You served for a year
without disciplinary incident, but on 31 October 1988, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for two periods of failure
to go to your appointed place of duty. The punishment imposed
was restriction for 15 days and an oral reprimand.
On 19 December 1989 you again received NUP for failure to go ts
your appointed place of duty, and were awarded an oral reprimand.
Shortly thereafter, you were the subject of an investigation into
black-marketing. During the investigation you admitted
culpability, stating, 1n part, that you had purchased about
$13,500 tax-free merchandise and sold it to Italian Nationals.
As a result, on 23 May 1990, you received NUP for wrongful
purchase and disposal of tax-free personal property. The
punishment imposed was a reduction in paygrade and a $700
forfeiture of pay.
In May 1990, you observed participating in an homosexual act with
another Sailor in the barracks at Naples, Italy. Asa result, on
27 June 1990, you were again the subject of an investigation, at
which timé you admitted tHat the foregoing act occurred, but you
were “forced by another Sailor” into participating in the
homosexual act.
On 16 August 1990 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense as evidenced by your NdPs and black-marketing
offenses and homosexuality. After consulting with legal counsel
you elected your right to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 25 September 1990 an ADB recommended
discharge under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due
to commission of a serious offense. Less than a month later, on
15 October 1990, your received your fourth NJP for wrongful
appropriation and failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
Subsequently, your commanding officer, in concurrence with the
ADB, also recommended discharge under honorable conditions by
reason misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 19
December 1990 the discharge authority approved these
recommendations and directed your commanding officer to issue you
a general discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 10 January
1991, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also
considered your assertion that the discharge was too severe for
the only isolated offense in your 39 months of service.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which
resulted in four NUPs and included black-marketing offenses of
nearly $14,000 of tax-free merchandise. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03814-07
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 January 1982 the discharge authority directed discharge under honorable conditions by reason of drug abuse. 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 | CY2002 | 05121-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted Your allegations of error and your naval record and applicable statutes, After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07210-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, initially considered and denied your application on 22 July 2008. After the statements had been gathered an informal disciplinary review board consisting of senior noncommissioned officers examined the statements and conducted individual interviews of the seven Sailors who had accused you of sexual misconduct. Your commanding officer also testified before the ADB.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08967-05
In his endorsement on your appeal CSG2 analyzed the evidence concerning the charge of indecent assault and stated that he believed a preponderance of the evidence supported his finding of guilty. He conceded that the evaluation at issue was erroneously prepared and indicated that action would be taken to file a corrected evaluation but strongly recommended that your application for advancement to chief petty officer be denied. The opinion concluded by stating that given the no misconduct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002745C070205
The applicant requests, in effect, the removal of his name from the title block of two United States Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC) Reports of Investigation (ROI). On 8 February 1994, the applicant dispatched a letter to the Contraband Control Office in which he indicated that he would not submit to interrogation regarding his exchange purchases and invited officials to proceed with charges and to inform him of the hearing date. Based on the evidence submitted by the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11360-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _application on 9 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. On 29 October 1991 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03641-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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 | CY2013 | NR4928 13
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. As a result, you were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to homosexuality. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, tthe burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021888
She adds she was assigned to work for a lieutenant who was a racist. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. The applicant contends that her bad conduct discharge should be upgraded because she was entrapped, which led to the charges for her trial by court-martial.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02908-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2008. Subsequently, your commanding officer also recommended a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by five NJPs, pre-service misconduct, and psychiatric problems. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...