Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02229-09
Original file (02229-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100

 

TUR
Docket No: 2229-09
27 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 20 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 13 July 1984 at age 19. You served
without disciplinary incident until 3 December 1984, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for wrongfully giving away’
a liberty card. The punishment imposed was restriction and extra
duty for five days.

During the period from 23 February to 6 April 1985 you received
NUP for five periods of absence from your appointed place of
duty, three periods of failure to go to your appointed place of
duty, and dereliction of duty. You were also counselled on
several occasions regarding deficiencies in your performance and
conduct, specifically, periods of unauthorized absences, drug and
alcohol abuse, personal problems, getting sufficient rest to
perform your duties, and advancement preparation.

subsequently, you were notified.of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct and frequent involvement of a discreditable nature
with military authorities. At that time you waived your right to
consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 10 April 1985 your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct and frequent involvement of a discreditable nature
with military authorities. 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.

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. It also
considered your assertion that you became an alcoholic after
enlisting in the Navy. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
Gischarge because of the seriousness of your repetitive
misconduct which resulted in four NJPs and numerous counselling
sessions which included your abuse of alcohol. Finally, you were
given an opportunity to defend yourself but waived your
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 Gemonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,
We

DEAN
Beeoukive e sor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01710-09

    Original file (01710-09.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 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. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend yourself...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03030-10

    Original file (03030-10.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 waiving your procedural rights to legal counsel and an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended discharge...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01634-09

    Original file (01634-09.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 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 | CY2011 | 04042-11

    Original file (04042-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 January 1977 you received NUP for absence from your appointed place of duty and two specifications of failure to obey a lawful order. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of the narrative reason for separation because of the seriousness of your repeated and frequent misconduct which resulted in nine NUJPs, counselling on several occasions for involvement of a discreditable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04237-09

    Original file (04237-09.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. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06346-07

    Original file (06346-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2010 | 03048-10

    Original file (03048-10.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. 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 | CY2010 | 04524-09

    Original file (04524-09.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. However, on 11 October 1980, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge, but directed your commanding officer to issue you a general discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 12 November 1980, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • 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 | CY2010 | 11286-10

    Original file (11286-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...