DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY.
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 1710-09
‘ll January 2010
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 5 January 2010. 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 Navy on 26 January 1984 at age 23 and began a
period of active duty on 16 February 1984. You served without |
disciplinary incident until 11 January 1985, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for missing the movement of your
ship and a 39 day period of unauthorized absence (UA). Shortly
thereafter, on 31 January 1985, you received NUP for wrongful use
of marijuana.
On 10 January 1986 you received your third NUP for wrongful use
of marijuana, misbehavior as a sentinel, and disobedience. The
punishment imposed was a $716 forfeiture of pay and confinement
on bread and water for three days: Subsequently, you were
notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of
misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature
with military authorities and a pattern of misconduct. At that
time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to
present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
23 January 1986 your commanding officer recommended discharge
under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due
to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military
authorities and a pattern of misconduct. On 19 February 1986 the
discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed
your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable
discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 21 February 1986, 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 desire to upgrade your
discharge. It also considered your assertion that had you been
afforded the opportunity to receive alcohol and drug abuse
rehabilitation you could have continued to-serve in the Navy.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which
resulted in three NUJPs and included drug abuse. Further, you
were given an opportunity to defend yourself but waived the
procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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 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 P E .
Executive tar
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03048-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2011. 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 received two more NUPs on 24 January and 18 February 1983 for falsifying an official document, a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12555 11
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2012. Documentary material considered by +he 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
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 | CY2007 | 06346-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. 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 | 02229-09
the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1985 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 30 April 1985, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03253-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 January 2012. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, post service conduct, desire to upgrade the characterization of your discharge, and assertion that you were told that your discharge would be upgraded seven years after your separation. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04514-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2010. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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 | CY2011 | 12516 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2012. During the period from 9 January to 31 July 1986 you received NUP on two more occasions for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and impersonating a petty officer to gain entrance to an Army noncommissioned officer's club. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01634-09
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. On 25 May 1985 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 7 June 1985, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03030-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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. After waiving your procedural rights to legal counsel and an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended discharge...