. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 10014
TAL
Docket No: 8690-13
30 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 17 September 2014. 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
18 October 1982 at age 18. You received nonjudicial punishment
on two occasions for unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit
for a period of 20 days, missing ship’s movement and failure to
go to your appointed place of duty. On 18 October 1988 you were
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two instances of UA
from your unit for a period totaling 88 days and breaking
restriction. The sentence imposed was confinement and reduction
in paygrade. On 21 November 1988, you were notified of pending
administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable
(OTH) discharge due to misconduct. After consulting with legal
counsel, you elected to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 25 January 1989, the ADB found that
you committed misconduct (commission of a serious offense) and
recommended that you be separated with an OTH discharge. Your
commanding officer concurred with the ADB and forwarded his
recommendation to the separation authority. On 15 March 1989,
the separation authority agreed with the recommendation of the
ADB and directed your commanding officer to issue you an OTH
.discharge by reason of misconduct (commission of a serious
offense) and on 21 March 1989, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge given the’ seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in two NJPs and an SPCM. Finally, there is no
provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for
recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time.
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 within one year from the date of the Board’s
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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'NETLL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1624-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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 | CY2008 | 01582-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and elected to have your case heard by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4094-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 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 | NR5412 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 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 | 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 | CY2006 | 09598-06
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 25 July 1985 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18 and served without incident for more than 18...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7266 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. On 24 January 1989, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge ‘action.
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 | CY2010 | 05028-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 March 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2754-13
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, 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 . Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your...