Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00653-08
Original file (00653-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 653-08
12 September 2008

 

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 September 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 25 September 1980, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18.
During the period 20 November to 23 December 1981, you had
three nonjudicial punishments (NJP's). Your offenses included
conspiracy and bringing an illegal on board a naval vessel,
failure to obey a lawful order, drunkenness, possession of an
illegal weapon, disrespect, being intoxicated while on board
ship and in a restriction status, and drunk and disorderly
conduct.

On 24 December 1981, your commanding officer initiated
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to
frequent discreditable involvement, but later held the
discharge action in abeyance pending a substance abuse
evaluation. On 30 June 1982, you began residential alcohol
rehabilitation and it appears that your treatment was
terminated on 28 July 1982, due to your misuse of a government
vehicle. You then served without incident until

18 August 1983, when you had NUP for use and possession of
marijuana. On 7 September 1983, a substance abuse evaluation
found that you were not dependent on drugs.

Based on the information currently contained in the record,
it appears that your commanding officer subsequently initiated
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to
frequent discreditable involvement, but later reprocessed the
administrative separation recommendation by reason of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and drug abuse.

In connection with this processing, it appears that you
acknowledged that separation could result in an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge and waived the right to have your
case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On

10 October 1983, the separation authority approved the
discharge recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On

19 October 1983, 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
your belief that your discharge would change after six months.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due
to your misconduct. Furthermore, there is no provision in the
law or regulations that allows for recharacterization due solely
to the passage of time. The Board also noted that you waived
the right to have your case heard by an ADB, your best
opportunity for retention or a more favorable characterization
of service. 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,

\s

Ww. D
Executive Dire

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10122-07

    Original file (10122-07.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. During the period 12 November 1982 to 18 February 1983, you had three NUP's. 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 | 06734-08

    Original file (06734-08.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. Apparently, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. 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 | 05807-08

    Original file (05807-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08620-09

    Original file (08620-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 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 | CY2007 | 05739-07

    Original file (05739-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for A Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2008. The Board also considered your contention that a DD Form 214 was issued at the time of your discharge, which showed that you received a general discharge due to failure to adapt. 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 | 08476-08

    Original file (08476-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. 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 | 03403-08

    Original file (03403-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR303 13

    Original file (NR303 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. 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. Administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05427-07

    Original file (05427-07.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 15 October 1981, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent. In connection with this...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11987-10

    Original file (11987-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval > record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...