DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON Dc 20370-5100 SUN
Docket No: 04845-10
3 March 2011
This is in referen ‘cation for correction of your
late brother, naval record pursuant to the
provisions of e 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 1 March 2011. 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 late brother's naval record, and applicable
statutes, regulations, and policies.
Bfter 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.
Your late brother enlisted in the Navy and began a period of
active duty on 19 December 1984. The Board found that he was
counseled regarding periods of unauthorized absences (UA) and
wrongful use of a controlled substance, and warned that further
misconduct could result jn administrative discharge action.
During the period from 23 August 1986 to 6 March 1987, he
received three nonjudicial punishments (NJP's) for larceny,
making a false official statement, and four periods of
unauthorized absence totaling three days. Again, he was
counseled and warned about the consequences of further
misconduct. On 9 April 1987, he was convicted by summary court -
martial (SCM) of wrongful use of marijuana. He was sentenced to
confinement at hard labor and a forfeiture of pay. On 15 Ooheber
1987, he received his fourth NJP for absence from his appointed
place of duty, three instances of disobedience, and
incapacitation for the proper performance of his duties.
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. He waived
his rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have his
case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). His case
was forwarded recommending that he be discharged under other than
honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. His
commanding officer stated, in part, that he clearly demonstrated
his inability to conform to military discipline, needed to avoid
drugs, and had no potential for further service. On 29 October
1987, he received his fifth NUP for three instances of absence
from his appointed place of duty and disobedience. On 29
November 1987, the discharge authority concurred with the
‘recommendation for separgfion and directed an OTH discharge by
*eason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. He was so
&discharged on 19, December 1987.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as his youth, record of
service, and belief that his characterization of service would be
upgraded after,a period of years. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of his discharge given his five NUP’s,
conviction by $CM of drug use, and the fact that he was counseled
and warned on several occasions of the consequences of further
misconduct. Finally, you are advised that there is no provision
of law or in Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization
automatically after a number of years or due solely to the
passage of time. 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,
Executive Dive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10503-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned, after your First NUP, that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00131-10
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 | CY2013 | NR2510-13
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 | CY2013 | NR6723 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 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. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01507-11
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 a 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 | CY2007 | 07864-07
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 | CY2008 | 03688-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 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. On 28 August 1991, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10943-09
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 | CY2008 | 06162-08
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. During the period 4 April to 10 August 1978, you were in a UA status, a period of about 128 days. On 15 August 1979, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09227-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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.