Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01198-04
Original file (01198-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



                                                                                           FC
                                                                                           Docket No: 1198-04
                                                                                           2 August 2004


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 28 July 2004. 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 that the evidence submitted was submitted error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 18 August 1977 at age 17. During the period from 17 March 1978 to 1 July 1980 you received eight nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for six instances of disobedience, three periods of unauthorized absence totaling about four days, two instances of forgery, absence from your appointed place of duty, possession of hashish, destruction of government property, insubordination, communicating a threat, and two instances of disrespect.
On 12 July 1980 the commanding officer notified you of administrative separation processing because of frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. You then waived all of your procedural rights. On 22 July 1980 the commanding officer recommended administrative separation by reason of misconduct by reason of repeated involvement of a discreditable nature. On 24 October 1980 the separation authority advised the commanding officer to redo the statement of awareness to ensure the correct reason for administrative separation processing. On 8 November 1980 you were again notified of administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, and you waived all of your procedural rights. On 25 November 1980 the separation authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military or civil authorities. On 15 December 1980 you were so separated.





In its review of your case, the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth, and the length of time that has passed since you were discharged from the Navy. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your frequent misconduct that resulted in eight NJPs for various offenses that included drug possession. 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.















2
Sincere’ - -

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04128-12

    Original file (04128-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 February 1980 you were advised that administrative separation action had been initiated by reason of misconduct, but held in abeyance pending a medical evaluation for alcohol abuse. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $598 forfeiture of pay, and a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03980-07

    Original file (03980-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 2008. On 6 February 1980, the discharge authority directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06405-06

    Original file (06405-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 July 1978 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18, and on 31 October 1978 you received nonjudicial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02619-09

    Original file (02619-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 3 July 1980, you received NUP for assault and breach of the peace. On 30 July 1980, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement. 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 | CY1999 | 07582-98

    Original file (07582-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 1999. 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. However, during the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08266-00

    Original file (08266-00.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2001. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09667-06

    Original file (09667-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 27 August 1979 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 with parental consent. On 18 August 1981...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07289-09

    Original file (07289-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07289-09

    Original file (07289-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04524-09

    Original file (04524-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. However, on 11 October 1980, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge, but directed your commanding officer to issue you a general discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 12 November 1980, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...