DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20376-51006
TTR
Docket No: 4524-09
12 April 2010
nne..
“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 6 April 2010. The names and votes of the
members of thé 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 14 April 1987 at age 17 and began a
period of active duty on 2 June 1978. You served without
disciplinary incident until 26 March 1980, when you received |
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disrespect and wrongful
possession of marijuana. Shortly thereafter, on 8 April 1980,
you were issued a letter of warning regarding your frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
During the period from 3 to 18 June 1980 you were in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status that was not terminated until
you surrendered to civil authorities on charges of possession of
Marijuana. Subsequently, you were returned to military custody,
and on 23 June 1980, you received NIP for a 13 day period of UA.
On 30 June 1980 you received your third NUP for two periods of
absence from your appointed place of duty.
On 4 September 1980 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to 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 16 September 1980 your commanding officer recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature
with military authorities and a pattern of misconduct as
evidenced by three NUJPs and being counselled on numerous
occasions. 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.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, period of satisfactory service, 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 frequent misconduct
which resulted in three NUPs and included drug abuse. Further,
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,
Les Qon6
W. DEAN P ie
Bxecutive Pirector
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04498-09
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 12 September 1980, you received NUP for 16 periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and a 20 day period of UA. 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 | CY2010 | 11286-10
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04128-12
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 February 1980 you were advised that administrative separation action had been initiated by reason of misconduct, but held in abeyance pending a medical evaluation for alcohol abuse. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $598 forfeiture of pay, and a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02619-09
On 3 July 1980, you received NUP for assault and breach of the peace. On 30 July 1980, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement. 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 | CY2007 | 02971-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 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. As a result, on 30 September 1982, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to hold your separation in abeyance pending...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06717-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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 | CY2008 | 00598-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 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 | CY1999 | 07289-09
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07289-09
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00682-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 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...