Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03870-11
Original file (03870-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100%
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

SIN
Docket No: 03870-11
15 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 14 February 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
7 April 1993. The Board found that on 24 February 1994, you
were counseled with regard to being absent from your appointed
place of duty, and warned that further misconduct could result
in administrative discharge action. On 12 August 1994, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA). On 15 September and 19 September
1994, you received NUP for UA and sleeping on watch.
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. You
elected to consult counsel and have your case heard before an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 31 October 1994, the
ADB recommended separation with an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. On 9 November 1994, your commanding officer
concurred with the ADB’s finding and forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged. On 23 November 1994, the
separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of
misconduct. On 30 November 1994 you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record
of service, and belief that your characterization of service
would automatically be upgraded after six months. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your three NJP’s, and
the fact that you were counseled and warned before your first
NIP of the consequences of further misconduct. Finally, you are
advised that there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations
that allows for recharacterization automatically after six
months or due solely to the passage of time. 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,

\S DEAN Senn.
Executive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03090-11

    Original file (03090-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 06305-11

    Original file (06305-11.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 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 | 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 | 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 | 11325-10

    Original file (11325-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2011. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge 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 | CY2009 | 03292-09

    Original file (03292-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval “Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2010. 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 | 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 | CY2012 | 01682 12

    Original file (01682 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 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 | CY2012 | 00286-12

    Original file (00286-12.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 September 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 9 May 1986, you received NUP for being UA for one day.