Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00369-11
Original file (00369-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TUR
Docket No: 369-11
21 October 2012

 

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 18 October 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
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 30 November 1989 at age 17 and began
a period of active duty on 13 August 1990. You served for nearly
two years without disciplinary incident, but on 6 July 1982 you
were convicted by civil authorities of sexual battery and
participation in a lewd and lascivious act with an underage
female. You were sentenced to confinement for three years and
probation for seven years.

On 12 July 1992, while in the custody of civil authorities, you
were processed for an administrative separation action by reason
of misconduct. After waiving your procedural right to consult.
with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to conviction by civil authorities. On 23 August
1993 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and
directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 1 September
1993, 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. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your misconduct which resulted in a conviction by civil
authorities. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend
yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case
to an ADB. 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,

Ld Newer!

W. DEAN PFE

Executive Dive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06143-10

    Original file (06143-10.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. 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 | CY2009 | 02207-09

    Original file (02207-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 2010. 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, the record clearly reflects that you were given an opportunity to defend yourself but waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04085-11

    Original file (04085-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    | A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your > application on 25 January 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in a civil conviction, an NJP and two SCMs. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3612 13

    Original file (NR3612 13.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 April 2014. 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 22 July 1993, you received a third NJP for UA and wrongful use of cocaine.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03535-12

    Original file (03535-12.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 February 2013. 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. 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 | CY2013 | NR6679 13

    Original file (NR6679 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 2014. 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 | CY2011 | 10173 11

    Original file (10173 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 22 August 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. On 8 September 1995, your case was heard and the ADB recommended that you receive an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06566-10

    Original file (06566-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 January 1994, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06294-07

    Original file (06294-07.rtf) 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.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 6 January 1992 at age 18. Additionally, you were counseled and warned...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04178-11

    Original file (04178-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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 probable...