Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09184-07
Original file (09184-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TJR
Docket No: 9184-07
6 November 2008

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 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 5 November 2008. 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 on 10 February 1986 at age 21. About
eight months later, on 7 October 1986, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for drunk and disorderly conduct and being
incapacitated for duty. The punishment imposed was extra duty
and restriction for 30 days, reduction to paygrade E-3, and a
$824 forfeiture of pay.

On 1 June and again on 8 December 1988 you received NUP for
signing a false official statement, insubordination, refusing to
get out of your rack, using provoking words and gestures, three
specifications of drunk and disorderly conduct, being
incapacitated for duty due to intoxication, and absence from your
appointed place of duty. A month later, on 9 January 1989 you
received your fourth NUP for failure to go to your appointed
place of duty, breaking restriction, disobedience, and a three
day period of unauthorized absence (UA).
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. At that time you waived your right to consult with
legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 18 January 1989 your commanding
officer recommended discharge under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and alcohol
rehabilitation failure. On 27 January 1989 the discharge
authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than
honorable discharge, and on 1 February 1989, you were so
discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. At that time
you declined in-patient treatment at a veterans’ hospital for

your alcohol abuse.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and desire to upgrade your
discharge and change your reenlistment code so that you may
reenlist. It also considered your assertion that your
misconduct, discharge, and reenlistment code were the result of
your abuse of alcohol. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge or a change of the reenlistment code because of your
frequent and repetitive misconduct which resulted in four NUPs.
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,

IWdenSeh, AD

W. DEAN PF
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4915 14

    Original file (NR4915 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2015. 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. Regarding your assertion, alcohol abuse may be a mitigating factor for misconduct; however, the Board felt your multiple incidents of misconduct prior...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00279-10

    Original file (00279-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 2010. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11360-10

    Original file (11360-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _application on 9 August 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. On 29 October 1991 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00923 12

    Original file (00923 12.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 October 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05359-09

    Original file (05359-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2010. 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 | CY2007 | 05462-07

    Original file (05462-07.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 19 March 1987, you acknowledged the Navy~s drug and alcohol abuse policy. Finally, the Board noted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01157-11

    Original file (01157-11.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 7 August 1989 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty. 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 | CY2009 | 04571-09

    Original file (04571-09.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 31 July 1991, you received NUP for drunk and disorderly conduct. 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 | CY2008 | 07239-08

    Original file (07239-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 8 April 1983, you were counseled regarding your unsatisfactory performance and conduct, advised that the command would assist you with alcohol...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05757-10

    Original file (05757-10.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. Finally, the Board also noted on 5 June 1987 you were offered the right to request in-patient alcohol rehabilitation treatment from the Veterans Administration Hospital nearest your home, but signed a waiver refusing treatment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...