DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5106
CRS
Docket No: 10237-08
7 December 2009
ta: +a cu :
This 1s itm 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 16 October 2009. 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 17 August 1987,
and were commigsioned as a lieutenant (junior grade) on 9 June
1995. You were promoted to lieutenant on 1 July 1999. You
appeared at nonjudicial punishment proceedings on 25 November
2002. You were found to have wrongfully used cocaine during
August 2002, and were awarded a letter of reprimand as punishment
for that offense. On 7 November 2003 a Board of Inquiry found
that you had not committed misconduct due to drug abuse and voted
to retain you in the Navy. On 1 September 2004 you appeared at
nonjudicial punishment proceedings and were found to have
wrongfully used cocaine during July 2004. The punishment awarded
consisted of restriction for 30 days and a punitive letter of
reprimand. On 3 November 2004 you tendered a resignation for the
good of the service in lieu of administrative separation
‘processing for misconduct and substandard performance of duty.
The Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower and Reserve
Affairs approved your request on 20 December 2004, and directed
that you be separated from the Navy by reason of misconduct with
a discharge under other than honorable conditions. You were.so
discharged on 31 January 2005.
The Board found no merit in your request to set-aside the
nonjudicial punishments or to remove related documents from your
record. In this regard, the Board concluded that the officers who
conducted the nonjudicial punishment proceedings acted reasonably
in determining that you had wrongfully used cocaine, and that
they imposed appropriate punishments. The Board concluded that
you did not submit sufficient credible evidence to establish that
you did not commit the offenses for which you were punished.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The Board did not consider whether your characterization of
service or reason for separation should be changed, since you
have not exhausted an available administrative remedy by applying
to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for such relief. You
may do so by submitting the attached DD Form 293 to the NDRB.
The Board did not consider your requests for removal of
nonjudicial punishment-related fitness reports and failures of
selection for promotion, or for the convening of a special
selection board, because those issues are within the purview of
the Board’s Performance Section. Your case will be referred to
that section and assigned a new docket number to allow
appropriate tracking and review of that pertion of your
application.
The Board did not consider your request for removal of time lost
because there is no lost time reflected in your DD Form 214.
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,
Nea D
W. DEAN PFREXF
Executive D or
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501504
Charge IV: Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Specification 1: In that Lieutenant Junior Grade S_ J. D_(Applicant), U.S. Navy, USS STETHEM, on active duty, having knowledge of a lawful order issued by Commanding Officer, USS STETHEM, to wit: NONPUNITIVE LETTER OF CAUTION, dated December 02, 2002, an order which it was her duty to obey, did, on or about Dec 03, 2002, fail to obey the same by wrongfully continuing a personal relationship with GM2 R_ D. M_. Specification 2: In that Lieutenant...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501051
950414: Chief of Naval Personnel recommended to Secretary of the Navy approval of Applicant’s qualified resignation request for a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge in lieu of further administrative show cause proceedings. When the service of an officer of the U.S. Navy has met the standard of acceptable conduct and performance, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. The record documents that this resignation request followed the Chief of Naval Personnel’s...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04896-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2003. At the time of his BOI, it was customary to only file BOI findings in an officer's record if the findings included a recommendation to discharge the officer. The BOI findings not being included in his official record did not make his record incorrect, nor did it disadvan.tage him during the selection boards.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07374-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2011. The rec ra reflects that on 17 May 2007 you were subsequently found guilty of only one specification of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman for the period cited “between on or about November 2004 and on or about May 2005." The Board concluded that your commanding officer's decision to impose the foregoing NUP, and the punishment imposed,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11456-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. application on 7 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.
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700620
Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1.Isolated incident. Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment:Finances:Education: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service:References:Additional Statements From Applicant: Additionally, the Board has...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600531
After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. The evidence reviewed, including the Applicant’s own admission, supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed the misconduct, that separation from the Naval service was appropriate, and that a general (under honorable conditions) discharge was warranted. Secretary of the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 13164 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2012. On 18 April 2011, a report of the NUP was forwarded to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command (NPC). The results of the BOI were forwarded and you were informed that you would be retained in the Navy, but that the NUP would become part of your official record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07085-00
PERS-833 recommends disapproving Petitioner ’s request to remove the letter which removed his name from the promotion board report. ” e. In correspondence attached as enclosure PERS-06L6, the NPC Office of Legal Counsel, has commented that they recommend favorable action on Petitioner ’s request to have removed from his permanent record all reference to the NJP which has been set aside, but do not recommend favorable action on his request to remove the contested letter. c. Reference (b)...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501485
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). 961001: Commander, Naval Training Center, Great Lakes, directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct drug abuse. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:Secretary of the Navy...