DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SUN
Docket No: 06352-10
4 Bpril 2011
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 29 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 18 March 1992 after serving over
18 years of honorable service. The Board found that on 27 May
1992, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of
dereliction of duty by wrongfully sexually harassing a female
servicemember in a military work environment. You were sentenced
to confinement, a reduction in paygrade, and a forfeiture of pay.
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. You
elected to consult counsel and have your case heard before an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 10 August 1992, the ADB
recommended that you be separated from the naval service with a
general discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of
serious offense. On 19 October 1992, your commanding officer
concurred with the ADB’s findings and forwarded his
recommendation to the separation authority that you receive a
general discharge. On 24 November 1992, the discharge authority
directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct. You were
so discharged on 7 December 1992.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your 18 years of
prior honorable, medical issues, and last period of service.
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your conviction by SPCM of a very serious offense. Finally, the
Board also noted that you were fortunate to receive a general
discharge since a discharge under other than honorable conditions
cis often directed when an individual is discharged for
“misconduct. Accordifigly,, your application has been denied. The
“names and votes ,of the members of the panel will be furnished
{upen..request . . {
‘The Board believes that you may be eligible for veterans’
‘benefits that accrued during your prior period of service.
Whether or not you are eligible for benefits based on either
period of service is a matter under the cognizance of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). If you have been denied
benefits, you should appeal that denial under procedures
established by the DVA.
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,
W. DEAN 'PREI
£O
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01317-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2009. You elected to consult counsel and have your case heard by 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 | 04633-10
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 | 06072-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01614-11
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 | CY2008 | 01582-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 2008. 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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and elected to have your case heard by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02245-11
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 | 12117-10
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. However, neither the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) nor Department of Defense (DoD) considers an upgrade to a general discharge by the SDRP to entitle you to any benefits denied by reason of the original discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11889-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 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 | CY2007 | 09728-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2008. On 1 May 1992, 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 or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08010-10
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...