Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11704-09
Original file (11704-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100 SIN

Docket No: 11704-09
4 August 2010

 

nay

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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 3 August 2010. 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 and began a period of active duty on

16 June 1995. The Board found that during the period from

9 August to 18 September 1995, you received three nonjudicial
punishments (NJP’s) for four periods of unauthorized absence (UA)
totaling four days, disobedience, wrongful use of marijuana, and
breaking restriction. Additionally, you were counseled and
warned after your first NUP, that further misconduct could result
in administrative discharge action. Subsequently, administrative
discharge action was initiated by reason of a pattern of
misconduct. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a
statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board (ADB). Your case was forwarded recommending that you be
discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason
of misconduct. The discharge authority concurred and directed an
OTH discharge by reason of a pattern of misconduct. On 13
November 1995 you were s0 discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your three NJP’s, one of which was for drug use, and the
fact that you were counseled and warned of the consequences of
further misconduct. The Board noted that you waived your right
to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.

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,

\s

W. DEAN P
Executive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06407-10

    Original file (06407-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 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 | 06195-09

    Original file (06195-09.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. Additionally, after your second NUP, 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...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 04685-09

    Original file (04685-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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. On 19 December 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit and dereliction of duty.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10364-09

    Original file (10364-09.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 ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00131-10

    Original file (00131-10.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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to 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 | 11373-10

    Original file (11373-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 July 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 9 June 1995, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12399-09

    Original file (12399-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 August 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your third NUP that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04424-11

    Original file (04424-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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. The Board found that on 10 November 1995, you were counseled regarding your behavior, and warned that further misconduct could result in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03292-09

    Original file (03292-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval “Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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...