DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 oo TAL
Docket No: 12365-08
30 October 2009
ea
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.
‘’~ three-member panel of the Roard for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 21 October 5009. 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 6 June 1983 after four years of
honorable service. On 22 November 1983, you received a civilian
-conviction for a customs violation for possession of undeclared
liquor. On 31 December 1984, you received a civilian conviction
for driving with a suspended license. On 4 February 1985, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two instances of
unauthorized absence (UA), disrespect toward an officer,
disobeying an officer and drunk on aduty. On 22 March 1985, you
received NIP for missing muster, drunk driving and communicating a
threat.
On 23 March 1985, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. You
waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have
your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
23 March 1985, your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
(OTH) conditions. On 26 March 1985, the discharge authority
directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to
commission of, a serious offense. On 10 April. 1985 you were so
discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, prior
honorable service, and overall last record of service.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your two civil convictions and the seriousness of your misconduct
resulting in two NUP’s. Finally, the Board noted that you waived
the right to an ADB, your best chance for retention or a better
characterization of service. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 06880-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00102-09
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. It was recommended that you be retained on active duty and warned that further misconduct of drug use could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06032-01
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 28 June 1982 for The record reflects that you were advanced four years at age 21. to BTFA (E-2) and served without incident until 25 February 1983, when you were convicted by special court-martial of communicating You were sentenced to confinement at hard a threat and assault. On 8 April 1983 the convening authority approved the You were released from During the 16 month period from September 1983 to January 1985 Your offenses you received...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06046-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 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 | CY2012 | 03979-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 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. On 6 April 1984, your case was heard by the ADB and by a unanimous vote of 3-0 you were recommended for administrative separation with an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01582 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 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. 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 | CY2011 | 00060-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. 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 | CY2010 | 09088-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03139-09
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...