DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
REC
Docket No: 00082-11
29 September 2011
a: i
i
4
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 28 September 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 Tnsut fiLeLent
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 27 December 1982, at age 28. On 10
October 1983, you were convicted by a civil court of being drunk
in public. You were sentenced to a fine of $30, and court costs.
On 2 November 1983, you were again convicted by a civil court of
being drunk in public. You were sentenced to a fine of $30, and
court costs. On 22 June 1984, you were convicted by another
civil court of being drunk in public. You were sentenced to
fines of $30, and court costs. On 30 August 1984, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for being in an unauthorized absence
(UA) status for 38 days, missing your ship’s movement, and
disobeying a lawful order. On 19 October 1984, you received NJP
for wrongful possession and use of marijuana. On 11 January
1985, you were convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of
being UA on four occasions totaling 48 days, missing your ship’s
movement, disobeying a lawful order, and wrongful possession and
use of marijuana. You were sentenced to forfeitures of $300,
reduction in pay grade, and confinement at hard labor for 30
days. On i8 February 1985, administrative separation action was
initiated by reason of misconduct (frequent involvement). You
waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have
your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your
misconduct continued and on 20 February 1985, you received NJP
for being UA from restricted musters on 17 occasions. On 16
March 1985, your commanding officer forwarded his recommendation
that you be discharged under other than honorable conditions
(OTH) by reason of misconduct (frequent involvement). On 18
March 1985, you were convicted by a SCM of being UA on 12
occasions from restricted musters. You were sentenced to a
forfeiture of $250, and confinement at hard labor for 30 days.
On 20 March 1985, the discharge authority directed an OTH
discharge by reason of misconduct (frequent involvement).
However, prior to being discharged, on 6 April 1985, you were
convicted by your third SCM of being disrespectful in language,
disobeying a lawful order, wrongfully communicating a threat, and
assault. You were sentenced to forfeiture of two thirds pay, and
confinement at hard labor for 30 days. On 16 May 1985, you
received your OTH characterization of service due to misconduct
(frequent involvement).
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 two NJP’s, three civil
convictions, and three convictions by SCM’s 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 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 P
Executive D or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5657 14
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. With regard to your assertion, the Board noted that your record contains documentation which reflects that you were notified in writing of the recommend you for discharge whit an under other than honorable characterization of service. Additionally, you initialed your Certificate of Release...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07198-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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. your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s and conviction by one SCM for misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04616-07
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.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 8 September 1982 at age 23 and served without disciplinary incident until...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02346-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03851-11
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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05254-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted Or your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policiés: After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00207 12
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 9 March 1984, 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 | CY2011 | 00214-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 13 October 2011. On 13 December 1961, you received NUP for three incidents of failure to go to your appointed place of duty. - 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.