Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01737-80
Original file (01737-80.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 1737-08

9 October 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 8 October 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

On 26 March 1986, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. On

8 July 1987, you were 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. On 23 July 1987, you had nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty
and misbehavior of a sentinel. You were also counseled
regarding these offenses and warned that further infractions
could result in disciplinary action or an OTH discharge.

During 20 to 29 March 1988, you were hospitalized for treatment
of alcoholism. On 10 May 1988, you were warned that failure to
satisfactorily complete substance abuse treatment or further
infractions could result in disciplinary action or an OTH
discharge. On 16 July and 21 November 1988, you had NJP for
failure to go to your appointed place of duty and a day of
unauthorized absence. On 21 November 1988, you were counseled
regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct and
warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary
action or an OTH discharge. You then served without incident

until 9 November 1989, when you had NUP for assault.

On 7 December 1989, your commanding officer initiated
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due toa
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 waived the
right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board (ADB). On 14 December 1989, the separation authority
approved the discharge recommendation and directed an OTH
discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. On 22 December 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.
The Board also considered your contention that alcohol abuse
contributed to your misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge due to your misconduct
that continued even after you were warned that further
infractions could result in an OTH discharge. Regarding your
contention, the record does show that you were diagnosed and
treated for alcoholism, but even if you were, that does not
excuse misconduct. 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,

  
  

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05741-07

    Original file (05741-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2008. On 15 January 1990, you began a UA that ended on 3 February 1990, a period of about 19 days. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct that continued even after you were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10247-07

    Original file (10247-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2008. 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 1i.September 1989, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05789-08

    Original file (05789-08.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. In connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and been afforded the right to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00415-07

    Original file (00415-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel’ of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. 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 April 1987 you were counseled regarding your continued failure to be at your appointed place of duty on time, and warned that failure to take...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05961-08

    Original file (05961-08.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. Regarding your contentions, there is no evidence in the record to show that you ever requested or were denied treatment for alcohol abuse, but...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04706-08

    Original file (04706-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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. On 20 July 1990, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07221-07

    Original file (07221-07.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 4 May 1988, you enlisted in the Navy at age 23.On 23 August 1988, you had nonjudicial punishment...

  • 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 | CY2007 | 07864-07

    Original file (07864-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10981-07

    Original file (10981-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel} of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 August 2008. 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 Bdard concluded that these factors and explanation were not) sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due...