Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11325-10
Original file (11325-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SGN
Docket No: 11325-09
21 July 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 19 July 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 navai 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

19 Suiy 1990. The Boara found that you received five nonjudicial
punishments (NgP's) for six periods of unauthorized absence (UA)
totaling 10 days, and disobedience. Additionally, you were
counseled and warned on 16 May 1994 that further misconduct could
result in administrative discharge action. Subsequently,
administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct after you violated your
counseling warning by going UA again. 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 a pattern of misconduct. You were 50
discharged on 10 June 1994.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your five NUJP’s, and the fact that you were counseled and
th warned of the consequences of further misconduct. Finally, the
“Ete. "Board noted that you waived the right to an ADB, your best chance
PaMiiene ey FO* retention or a better characterization of service.

Mie "Accordingly, 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,

\ss

W. DEAN R
Executive Diradct

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06381-10

    Original file (06381-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. 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 | 03729-10

    Original file (03729-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of thé Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. Additionally, after your third NJP, 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 | 08392-10

    Original file (08392-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03870-11

    Original file (03870-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2012. 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 | CY2010 | 10771-10

    Original file (10771-10.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 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03773-10

    Original file (03773-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. On 9 November 1990 you were so discharged. 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 | CY2013 | NR2527-13

    Original file (NR2527-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 May 1994, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. 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 | 06242-10

    Original file (06242-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or 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 | 05982-10

    Original file (05982-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. On 24 June 1994 you received the OTH discharge due to misconduct (pattern of misconduct).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12091-10

    Original file (12091-10.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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct. 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.