Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01779-09
Original file (01779-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX ,
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 1779-09
11 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 6 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 25 April 1985 at age 18 and began a
period of active duty on 18 September 1985. You served without
disciplinary incident until 7 March 1988, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for absence from your appointed
place of duty. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade
E-3, restriction and extra duty for 14 days, and a $150
forfeiture of pay, all of which was suspended for six months. A
year later, on 20 March 1989, you received NIP for wrongful use
of marijuana. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade
E-3, restriction for 60 days, and a $800 forfeiture of pay.

Subsequently, 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 21 April
1389 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On 24
April 1989 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 11 August 1989 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 22
August 1989, 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 and 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 drug related misconduct. 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,

Ls )
W. DEAN “PF
Bxecutive xr

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08752-09

    Original file (08752-09.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 June 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior service,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02216-09

    Original file (02216-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 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. 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 | CY2010 | 06684-10

    Original file (06684-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 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. 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 | CY2010 | 03033-10

    Original file (03033-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11198-07

    Original file (11198-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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. On 26 February 1992 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03627-10

    Original file (03627-10.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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06551-09

    Original file (06551-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03723-06

    Original file (03723-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval r cord, 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 6 July 1984 at age 19. On 31 May 1985 an ADB recommended an other than...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00792-10

    Original file (00792-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05312-08

    Original file (05312-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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...