DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 1539-12
5 December 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 4 December 2012. 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 5 December 1988 after more than
three years of prior satisfactory service. You continued to
serve for without disciplinary infraction until 23 March 1992,
when you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not
terminated until 30 March 1992. During this period of UA you
also missed the movement of your ship. On 29 May 1992 you were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a 65 day period of UA
and missing the movement of your ship. You were sentenced to
confinement for 30 days, a $523.80 forfeiture of pay, and
reduction to paygrade E-1.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
After waiving your procedural rights to legal counsel and an
administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On
1 August 1992 the discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed your commanding officer to discharge
you under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct, and on 13 August 1992, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your prior satisfactory service, post service conduct, and desire
to upgrade your discharge based on your entire record of service.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your second discharge
because of the seriousness of your lengthy period of UA from the
Navy. Finally, when you waived your procedural right to present
your case to an ADB, you forfeited any possibility to obtain a
better characterization of service. 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,
‘\y). Dees,
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2728-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 January 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 | CY1999 | 05767-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on i8 May 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. On 4 February 1992 you were again convicted by SCM of a 28 day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09544-06
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 7 August 1989 at age 18. On 6 March 1992 you were so discharged and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR00271 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. 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 were so discharged on 20 May 1992.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02730-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03409-11
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 waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), on 13 April 1993, your commanding officer recommended you be issued a discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03595-09
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 28 November 1990, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, You waived your rights to consuit counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00401-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06692-07
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 5 October 1993 at age 19. On 2 May 1994, you received nonjudicial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05217 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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...