Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01318-09
Original file (01318-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION GF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 29370-5100

 

TUR

a Docket No: 1318-09
. 23 July 2009

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 21 Juiy 2009. The names and votes of the

members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 February 1983 at age 18
and began a period of active duty on 22 March 1983. You served
for a year and three months without disciplinary incident, but
during the period from 28 June to 17 September 1984, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on three occasions for sleeping on
post, failure to go to your appointed place of duty, making a
false official statement, drunk and disorderly conduct, and two
specifications of assault.

On 5 October 1984 you were diagnosed as alcohol dependent and
began rehabilitation in a Level III program. However, on 4
January 1985, your treatment was terminated due to your wrongful
use of cocaine. Shortly thereafter, on 10 January 1985, you were
notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse. After consulting with legal
counsel, you elected to present your case to an administrative
discharge board {ADB}. On 5 March 1985 an ADB recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to drug abusé. On 8 March 1985 your commanding
officer, in concurrence with the ADB, also recommended discharge
under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due
to drug abuse. On 25 March 1985 the discharge authority approved
these recommendations and directed your commanding officer to
issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse, and on 28 March 1985, you were so
discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and your desire to upgrade your
discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your alcohol and drug related
misconduct which resulted in three NUPs and your failure of a
Level III rehabilitation program. Accordingly, your application
has been denied.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitied 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 | CY2010 | 08887-10

    Original file (08887-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 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 | CY2008 | 03165-08

    Original file (03165-08.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. On 12 April 1984, the separation authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct and, on 20 April 1984 you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00207 12

    Original file (00207 12.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. On 9 March 1984, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | 09205-07

    Original file (09205-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 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. 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 | CY2007 | 06169-07

    Original file (06169-07.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 7 September 1982, you reenlisted in the Naval Reserve at age 27 after a prior period of honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08218-08

    Original file (08218-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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 | 07538-08

    Original file (07538-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2009. On 7 December 1984 your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. 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 | 02403-08

    Original file (02403-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. 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 | 04122-08

    Original file (04122-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. On 8 June 1985, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct due...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01514 12

    Original file (01514 12.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. Shortly thereafter, on 30 April 1984, your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by three positive urinalyses, two NJPs for drug use, and civil conviction for DWI. Consequently, when applying...