Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02173-10
Original file (02173-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TJR
Docket No; 2173-10
14 January 2011

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 11 January 2011. 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 and began a period of active duty on 1
August 1989 at age 26. You served for a year and three months
without disciplinary incident, but on 16 November 1990, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty, drinking on duty, and contributing
alcoholic beverages to a minor.

On 22 August 1991 you received NUP for disobedience and two
specifications of being drunk on duty. Shortly thereafter, on 1
November 1991, you were convicted by civil authorities of making
a false report to the police. You were sentenced to pay a $1,000
restitution fee, $100 fine, $24 in court costs, and confinement
for 30 days. The confinement was suspended for two years.

On 10 January 1992 you began participating in a Level III alcohol

rehabilitation program. However, on 5 March 1992, due to your
"inappropriate behavior and unwillingness to continue with the

treatment, you failed the alcohol rehabilitation program.

On 9 April 1992 you received NJP for absence from your appointed
place of duty, a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), and
two specifications of disobedience. Shortly thereafter, on 13
April 1992, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and alcohol
rehabilitation failure. After consulting with legal counsel you
elected your right to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). 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. On 21 May
1992 your commanding officer also recommended discharge under
other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a
pattern of misconduct. Subsequently, the discharge authority
approved these recommendations and directed separation under
other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on
23 June 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, post service conduct, and desire to upgrade your
discharge. It also considered the character reference letter
provided in support of your case. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your repetitive misconduct in both the military and civilian
communities. Finally, no discharge is automatically upgraded
due solely to an individual's good post service conduct.
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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03175-09

    Original file (03175-09.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 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 9 November 1990 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty.

  • 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 | CY2009 | 09658-09

    Original file (09658-09.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. 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,...

  • 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 | 07257-09

    Original file (07257-09.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 May 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 04730-09

    Original file (04730-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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. As a result of this action, you failed the alcohol abuse rehabilitation program.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06412-08

    Original file (06412-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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...

  • 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 | 01536-10

    Original file (01536-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 2010. Shortly thereafter, you were notified of administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and waived your procedural right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...