Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10247-07
Original file (10247-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMW
Docket No: 10247-07

10 July 2008

 

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 9 July 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.

On.10 September 1986, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On
6 January 1988, you had nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for two
instances of wrongful possession of military identification
cards. You were also counseled regarding deficiencies in your
performance and conduct and warned that further infractions
could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable
(OTH) discharge. You subsequently began attending Alcoholics
Anonymous meetings and completed substance abuse treatment on
19 August 1988. On 12 and 20 April 1989, you had NUP for
wrongful possession of more than one identification card,
driving under the influence of alcohol, possession of a false
identification card with intent to deceive, and nine instances
of absence from your appointed place of duty.

On 20 July 1989, your commanding officer initiated
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to a
pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. In
connection with this processing, you acknowledged that
separation could result in an OTH discharge and elected to
have your case heard by an administrative discharge board
(ADB). On 26 July 1989, an ADB found that you were guilty of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a
serious offense, and recommended an OTH discharge. On

11 September 1989, the separation authority approved the
discharge recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On
1i.September 1989, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth
and desire for a better discharge. The Board also considered
the support that you provided the United States while your wife
served in Iraq. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct.
Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as
issued and no change is warranted. 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,

\ pen Pape

W. DEAN PFEIF
Executive Dir

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10658-09

    Original file (10658-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 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 | CY2010 | 00619-10

    Original file (00619-10.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. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 06500-08

    Original file (06500-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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. Shortly thereafter, on 24 August 1989, you received your third NUP for wrongful use of cocaine.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06195-09

    Original file (06195-09.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. Additionally, after your second NUP, you were counseled and warned that 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02222-08

    Original file (02222-08.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 connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02730-09

    Original file (02730-09.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 20 August 1988, you received NIP for four instances of UA, and failure to go to your appointed placed of duty. On 22 August 1988 you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03358-09

    Original file (03358-09.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. You were counseled and warned that 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 | CY2010 | 07387-10

    Original file (07387-10.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. 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 | CY2012 | 04339-12

    Original file (04339-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2013. Additionaily, you were counseled and warned that 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 | CY2011 | 03090-11

    Original file (03090-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.