DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BC
Docket No: 08241-13
2 September 2014
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 27 August 2014. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
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 27 February 1987. On 21 December
1989, you were convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of
being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status on three occasions
totaling 46 days and two incidents of missing ship’s movement.
You were sentenced to a forfeiture of $540, reduction in pay
grade and 15 days restriction. on 29 May 1990, you were
convicted by an SCM of being UA for 45 days and sentenced to a
forfeiture of $482, reduction in pay grade and 30 days
_ confinement. On 6 July 1990, you received nonjudicial
‘punishment (NJP) for being UA for three days. On 17 September
1990, you were advised that your commanding officer was
recommending you for administrative separation. You elected to
have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).
On 26 November 1990, your case was heard and the ADB determined
that you had committed misconduct that warranted administrative
separation under other than honorable conditions {UOTHC). Your
commanding officer concurred with the ADB. The discharge
authority approved the recommendation and directed a discharge
UOTHC by reason of misconduct - commission of a serious offense.
On 16 January 1991, you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4
(ineligible for reenlistment) reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, considered all
potentially mitigating factors present in your case.
Nevertheless, the Board found those factors insufficient to
warrant changing the ‘characterization of your discharge, given
your very extensive record of misconduct. 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,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8247 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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 elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01358-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 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 13 August 1990, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8891 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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 received restriction, extra duty and a forfeiture of pay.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06381-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5488 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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 | CY2013 | NR6421 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 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 | CY2013 | NR7163 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 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 elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02220-11
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. On 30 July 1990, the ADB recommended separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...