Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00515-09
Original file (00515-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS
Docket No: 515-09
16 March 2009

 

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 4 March 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 15 July 2002.
You received a positive urinalysis for methamphetamines on 2 June
2004. You admitted to using the drug.

On 15 October 2004 your commanding officer recommended that you
be separated from the Navy with a discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation was
approved and you were so discharged on 9 July 2004.

The Board did not accept your contention to the effect that your
discharge was too harsh. The Board concluded that your
commanding officer acted reasonably in your case and that your
discharge was not too harsh. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.

ft 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
eyidence or other maltler not previously considered by the Board.

fn this regard, it 18 jimportant 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 PF
Executive ré&ttor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7666 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7666 14_Redacted.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 2015. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04567 11

    Original file (04567 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 15 February 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 Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09465-07

    Original file (09465-07.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 6 December 1983 at age 18. An administrative discharge board (ADB) met...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09403-08

    Original file (09403-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2009. On 8 September 1986 you received NUP for a 31 day period of unauthorized absence (UA). 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 | 06077-08

    Original file (06077-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02224-07

    Original file (02224-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 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. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your conviction by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02911-07

    Original file (02911-07.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. 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 | CY2004 | 09184-04

    Original file (09184-04.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 3 October 1985 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until 11...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09424-08

    Original file (09424-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. In this regard, you did not appeal your NUPs or submit rebuttal statements to your substandard performance evaluations.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03615-10

    Original file (03615-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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...