Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03175-09
Original file (03175-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5106

TIR
Docket No: 3175-09
8 March 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 2 March 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 16 November 1987 at age 18 and began
a period of active duty on 23 November 1987. You continued to
serve without disciplinary incident until 22 June 1989, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP} for forgery. On 9 November
1990 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of
duty.

During the period from 18 January to 19 July 1991 you received

NUP on three more occasions for three periods of absence from

your appointed place of duty and disobedience. During this

-period you also participated in a rehabilitation program after

being diagnosed as alcohol dependent. However, you were
terminated from the program, in part, due to your minimizing the
consequences of your drinking, blaming external factors for your
problems, and resistance to group processes. Subsequently, you
were returned to duty.
On 12 February 1992 you received NJP for three periods of UA
totalling three days. Shortly thereafter, on 8 March 1992, you
were notified of pending administrative separation action by
reason of misconduct due to 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
17 March 1992 you received your seventh NJP for failure to obey a
lawful order. On 26 March 1991 your commanding officer
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced
by seven NUPs. On 28 March 1992 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 13 April 1992 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 repetitive misconduct which resulted in seven NUJPs and
include alcohol rehabilitation failure. 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 demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

\ges

W. DEAN PF
Executive D xX

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2933-13

    Original file (NR2933-13.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 April 2014. 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2510-13

    Original file (NR2510-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2014. You were "80 discharged .On 29 October 1992. , Ce The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially’ mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post service accomplishments, character letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04571-09

    Original file (04571-09.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 31 July 1991, you received NUP for drunk and disorderly conduct. 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 | 02173-10

    Original file (02173-10.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 6 May 1992 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and alcohol rehabilitation failure. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10943-09

    Original file (10943-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 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 | 11360-10

    Original file (11360-10.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 August 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. On 29 October 1991 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 06760 12

    Original file (06760 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. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 15 May 1987. 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 | CY2012 | 05740-12

    Original file (05740-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2013. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12050 11

    Original file (12050 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 22 August 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03581-08

    Original file (03581-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. when applying for a correction of an official naval urden is on the applicant to demonstrate the probable material error or injustice.