DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 12424-10
12 August 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 10 August 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 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
10 September 1984 at age 18. On 25 February 1987, you were
convicted in the Circuit Court of Duval County, Florida, of
simple battery and sentenced to six months probation. You
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on two occasions for
unauthorized absence from your unit for a period of five days and
wrongful use of cocaine. After your first NUP, you were
counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further
offenses could result in administrative separation. You were
notified of pending administrative discharge processing under
honorable conditions due to misconduct (drug abuse). You elected
to consult with legal counsel and subsequentiy requested an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 12 June 1987, an ADB
recommended by unanimous vote that you be separated with a
general discharge for misconduct due to drug abuse.
Subsequently, your commanding officer concurred with the ADB and
forwarded your case to the discharge authority for review.
On 8 September 1987, you received a general discharge for
misconduct (drug abuse}.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct. The
Board also believed that you were fortunate to receive a general
discharge since a separation under other than honorable
conditions is often directed when a Sailor is separated for
misconduct. 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.
Consequentiy, 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,
yy) Dane’ )
W. DEAN TN
Executive Dikec
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05790-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of NUP for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10642-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval | Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. Conseguently, 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 | 00475-11
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. you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 20 November 1987, you were 5o discharged. 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 | 06732-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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 | CY2010 | 03615-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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 | CY2010 | 11116-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your — application on 19 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. The Roard found that on 21 August 1987, you were briefed on the Navy’s drug and alcohol abuse policy.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00754-11
An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the exiatence of probable material error or injustice. 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 | 01157-11
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. On 7 August 1989 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty. 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 | 05210-10
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. On 24 December 1987, you were so discharged. 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 | 05175-10
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. 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant...