Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08957-10
Original file (08957-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 8957-10
28 April 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 26 April 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
errer or LA juSetice.

You reenlisted in the Navy on 8 May 1989 after more than four
years of honorable service. You were convicted by civil
authorities of conspiracy to defraud your automobile insurance
company of $9,000.00. You were then notified that your
commanding officer was recommending you for administrative
separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization
of service due to misconduct (commission of a serious offense) .
You waived your procedural right to an administrative discharge
board (ADB). On 16 September 1991, you received an OTH
characterization of service due to misconduct (commission of a
serious offense), and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended
for retention) reentry code.

In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
prior honorable service. However, the Board concluded that
your discharge should not be changed due to your civil
conviction. The Board found that you waived your right to an
ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. You are advised that no discharge
is upgraded automatically due solely to the passage of time or
post service good conduct. In view of the above, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

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,

DBS

F
Executive DWreito

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00060-11

    Original file (00060-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11530-10

    Original file (11530-10.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. Subsequently, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11372-10

    Original file (11372-10.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 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. On 13 April 2005, your case was forwarded and the discharge authority concurred with the ADB’s finding and recommendation, and directed that you be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01045-11

    Original file (01045-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your case you be discharged under other by reason of misconduct .. The directed an OTH discharge by 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 | 03377-10

    Original file (03377-10.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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | 09699-10

    Original file (09699-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 05028-10

    Original file (05028-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

  • 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 | CY2010 | 12124-10

    Original file (12124-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commigsion of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00394-10

    Original file (00394-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 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.