Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12271 11
Original file (12271 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

 

BAN
Docket No: 12271-11
29 November 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 29 November 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 entered active duty in the Navy on 3 October 1988, and served
without disciplinary incident until 29 March 1990, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for three specifications of
failing to go to your appointed place of duty. Shortly
thereafter, you received the following NUP’s: on 5 September 1990
for an unauthorized absence (UA); on 14 September 1990 for four
specifications of failing to go to your appointed place of duty;
and on 10 October 1990 for UA. You were recommended for
separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due toa
pattern of misconduct. You waived your rights to counsel and an
administrative discharge board (ADB). The separation authority
approved the recommendation, and on 9 November 1990, you were
separated with an OTH discharge due to misconduct and an RE-4
(not recommended for retention) reentry code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and claim that you had Asperger's Syndrome at the time
of the offenses. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge due to
your pattern of misconduct. Furthermore, the Board found you
waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention,
or a better characterization of service. Finally, the Board
noted that your current medical diagnosis does not prove that you
suffered from Asperger’s Syndrome while on active duty.
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,

BRIAN J. GEORGE
Head, Discharge Section

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04011-11

    Original file (04011-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2012. On 11 December 1990, you received the OTH discharge for misconduct (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 | 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 02222-08

    Original file (02222-08.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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07886-08

    Original file (07886-08.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 May 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12050 11

    Original file (12050 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01322 12

    Original file (01322 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 4 December 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 19 October 1990, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 10277 12

    Original file (10277 12.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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your first NUP, 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 | CY2008 | 02235-08

    Original file (02235-08.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 October 2008. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00387-12

    Original file (00387-12.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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...