Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00150-10
Original file (00150-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SJN
Docket No: 00150-10
12 October 2010

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 5 October 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

Inj Uetiee:

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on

28 August 1989. The Board found that you received four
nonjudicial punishments (NUP‘s) for seven instances of
disobedience, three periods of unauthorized absence, failure to
go to your appointed place ef duty, and wrongfully appearing for
inspection in an unclean uniform. Subsequently, administrative
discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a
commission of a serious offense. After being informed of your
procedural rights, you elected only to submit a statement and did
not object to the separation with the belief that you would
receive a general discharge for refusing alcohol rehabilitation

treatment. However, you were transferred and received an
other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct due
to commission of a serious offense. You were so discharged on

30 July 1991.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service and contention that you should have received a general
discharge due to your refusal of alcohol rehabilitation
treatment, not an OTH discharge. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your four NJP’s for
serious offenses. With regard to your contention, the Board
noted that the administrative separation process includes the
requirement that commands process service members for all reasons
for which minimum criteria are meet. This enables the separation
authority (SA) to approve separation for the most appropriate
xeason. The SA may direct reprocessing when a command fails to
process a thember for¥all reasons, as in your case. In this
‘regard, although you were notified that you were being
administratively separated due to refusal of alcohol
rehabilitation: ‘treatment, you were reprocessed by the SA for all
reasons, including misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct,
alcohol rehabilitation treatment failure, and misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. Finally, separation for
misconduct normally takes precedence over all other reasons for
separation. 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,

    
 

AN PF
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00135-10

    Original file (00135-10.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 October 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 Or your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13619-10

    Original file (13619-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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 20 April 1990, the medical department found that you were dependent on alcohol and recommended you receive inpatient Level III...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10244-09

    Original file (10244-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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 | CY2011 | 02473-11

    Original file (02473-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 October 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. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00851

    Original file (ND02-00851.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.920228: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure as evidenced by failure to successfully complete Level III Rehabilitation Aftercare treatment; misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by violation UCMJ Article 134, Drunk and disorderly conduct and violation UCMJ Article 86, Unauthorized absence; and misconduct due to drug...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00150

    Original file (ND00-00150.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant declined treatment.960723: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense as evidence by violation of UCMJ, Article 111 (Drunken driving) and Alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure, when he refused to participate in Level II Alcohol treatment.960723: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07928-09

    Original file (07928-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Ss sitting in executive session, considered your on on 11 May 2010. On 12 September 1990, the ADB met and unanimously found that you committed a serious offense, failed alcohol rehabilitation, and recommended that you be separated with a general discharge. 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 | 00396-11

    Original file (00396-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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 right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB}, on 13...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07864-07

    Original file (07864-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2008. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04765-01

    Original file (04765-01.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 October 2001. 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. In this regard,...