DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7015. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24590
TIR
Docket No: 7972-13
12 September 2014
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Titie 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 3 September 2014. The names and votes of the
members of the panel wili 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 began a period of active duty on 2
April 1986. You served for about eight months without
Gisciplinary incident, but during the period from 3 December 1986
to 6 August 1987, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on
three occasions for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA)
totalling 13 days, two specifications of disobedience, three
periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty, and
disrespect.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After
waiving your procedural rights, on 12 August 1987, your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due a pattern of
misconduct. Two days later, on 14 August 1987, you received your
fourth NIP for disobedience. On 17 August 1987, the discharge
authority approved the foregoing recommendation and directed
separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct, and on 21 August 1987, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and desire to join a>
veteran’s program. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which
resulted in four NJPs. Finally, you were given an opportunity to
defend your actions, but waived your procedural rights.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
It is regretted that tHe cigcumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be gf. ken. You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decisidh upon submission of new and material
evidence or ogher matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption gt 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
ROBERT J. O'NELLL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2687-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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. Additionally, you were counseled on more than one occasion regarding your misconduct, and warned that further misconduct could result...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6723 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 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. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02392-09
RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2010. Documentary material congidered 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 23 March 1988 you received NUP for two periods of UA totalling two days, failure to obey a lawful order, and four periods of absence from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3643 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 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 | CY2008 | 03149-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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. On 10 December 1986, you were counseled regarding your unacceptable performance, psychiatric diagnosis, advised where assistance was available, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08015-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 2008. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05473 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. 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 | 04874-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2010. After waiving your procedural rights, the discharge authority directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 3 November 1989, you were 50 discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5286 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient Co establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2433-13
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. 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.