Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10229-06
Original file (10229-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                   2 NAVY ANNEX
          WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100        

         CR S
Docket No: 10229-06
 26 January 2007


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 10 January 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 policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 31 May 1978. The record reflects that you received five nonjudicial punishments and were convicted by a special court-martial. The offenses included unauthorized absences totaling 58 days, larceny, and possession of two identification cards. Subsequently, on 5 May 1981 it was noted that you could not stop using drugs. When offered treatment on 24 May 1981, you failed to report. A second special court-martial convened on 26 September 1981 and found you guilty of failing to go to your appointed place of duty on 22 occasions and an unauthorized absence of four days.
On 5 November 1981 your commanding officer recommended that you be separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement. When informed of the recommendation, you elected to waive the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 18 December 1981 you received an other than honorable discharge.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and the contention that the Navy failed to help you with your drug problem. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of frequent involvement with military authorities. In this regard, you were the subject of seven disciplinary actions in a period of less than four years. Concerning your contention, the record shows that you failed to take advantage of treatment when it was offered. Further, drug use does not excuse misconduct, and disciplinary action and administrative separation are appropriate. 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 D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director



















2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05685-06

    Original file (05685-06.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 4 January 1980 at age 17 with parental consent. However, on 6 and 20...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07795-06

    Original file (07795-06.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 28 May 1976 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 18. During the period from 5 July to 28 July...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04498-09

    Original file (04498-09.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. On 12 September 1980, you received NUP for 16 periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and a 20 day period of UA. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11286-10

    Original file (11286-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10960-02

    Original file (10960-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 October 2003. On 17 August 1981 you received a fourth NJP for two periods of UA totalling four days and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days and a $80 forfeiture of pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is existence of probable on the applicant to demonstrate the material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03349-02

    Original file (03349-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2002. 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. At that time you denied suicidal ideation On 19 February 1982, after undergoing a You were sentenced to a $900 forfeiture paygrade E-l. On 12 April 1982 you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03048-10

    Original file (03048-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2011. 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 received two more NUPs on 24 January and 18 February 1983 for falsifying an official document, a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02994-01

    Original file (02994-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Dear This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 15 November 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. during the nine month period from November 1979 to December...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02227-03

    Original file (02227-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 August 2003. 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 | CY2004 | 01244-04

    Original file (01244-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary the 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 ±ris~if I iCi N1t. On 8 June 1981 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a five-day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded forfeitures of pay, a...