DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TJIR
Docket No: 3719-12
21 February 2013
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 20 February 2013. 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 and immediately began a period of active
duty on 9 December 1987. You served for about eight months
without disciplinary incident. However, during the period from
20 August 1988 to 20 March 1990, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) on five occasions for two specifications of
failure to obey a lawful order, three periods of unauthorized
absence (UA) totalling 25 days, dereliction of duty, making a
false official statement, and absence from your appointed place
of duty.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
After waiving your procedural right to consult with legal counsel
and to present your case to an administrative discharge board
(ADB), on 9 April 1990, your commanding officer recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 27 April
1990 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 10 May 1990,
you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your post service conduct 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 repetitive misconduct.
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,
W. tei,
Executive xr or
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 | CY2012 | 06880-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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 warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07515-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. general discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a An ADB recommended you be issued a After consulting with legal However, the discharge authority...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06412-06
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 13 September 1988 you enlisted in the Navy at age 20 and served without incident until 28 November...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 10246 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. Your record contains correspondence from the Bureau of Naval Personnel dated 13 July 1994 which states, in part, that the DD Form 553 (mark of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01395-03
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. to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2006 | 02065-06
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 Naval Reserve on 20 October 1988 at age 21 and served for eight months without...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01900-09
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. 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 7 September 1990, the separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00420-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04203-07
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.On 18 July 1989, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 23 after a prior period of honorable service. On...