DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 03509-11
1 February 2012
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 31 January 2012. 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 and began a period of active duty on
29 August 1975. The Board found that on 4 November 1976, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for 16 days of
unauthorized absence (UA). You received a suspended forfeiture
of pay, restriction, and were counseled and warned that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action, On
16 June and 11 August 1977, you received NUP for disobedience,
disrespect, and 32 days of UA. Subsequently, administrative
discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a
pattern of misconduct. You waived your rights to consult
counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB) provided you were
recommended for a general discharge. Your case was forwarded
recommending that you be separated from the naval service with a
general discharge by reason of misconduct. The discharge
authority concurred and directed a general discharge by reason
of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. You were so
discharged on 25 August 1977.
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 three NUP‘s, two of which you received
after you were warned of the consequences of further misconduct.
Finally, the Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a
general discharge since a discharge under other than honorable
conditions is often directed when an individual is discharged
for misconduct. 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.
ree
\y sat
executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00553 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. Additionally, 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 | 06305-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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 15 June and 3 August 1990, you received NJP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty, two periods of UA totaling 28 days, and disobedience.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03870-11
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01089 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 25 August and 3 september 1986, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04211-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01331-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 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. However, your request for discharge was denied on 12 January 1977.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03090-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05042-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2009. 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 | CY2012 | 01682 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 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 consulting with legal counsel, you elected to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08988-06
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.On 27 December 1974 you enlistedin the Navy at age 19. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these...