Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03514-11
Original file (03514-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

SIN
Docket No: 03514-11
2 February 2012

 

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 31 January 2012. 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.

On 17 December 1982, you reenlisted in the Navy after serving
over three years of honorable service. The Board found that
during the period from 3 January 1984 to 21 June 1985, you
received four nonjudicial punishments (NJP‘s} for wrongful use
of marijuana, wrongful use of provoking words, and five periods
of unauthorized absence. Additionally, you were counseled and
warned after your first NUP, that further misconduct could
result in administrative discharge action. Subsequently,
administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. You
elected to consult counsel and have your case heard before an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 23 July 1985, the ADB
found that you did commit misconduct and recommended separation
with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of
misconduct. On 26 July 1985, you received a fifth NUP for two
instances of disobedience. On 1 August 1985, your commanding
officer concurred with the ADB’s findings and forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged due to misconduct. He
stated, in part, that you had demonstrated total disregard for
good order and discipline since your initial NIP, were counseled
extensively by the chain of command, and had been afforded every
opportunity to correct your behavior pattern and declining
performance. Further, your declining performance resulted in
NIP while awaiting results of your ADB. On 20 August 1985, you
received another NJP for four instances of being absent from
your appointed place of duty. You were discharged with an OTH
characterization of service on 17 September 1985.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, prior
honorable service, and contention of discrimination.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your six NUJP’s, and the fact that you were counseled and warned
on several occasions of the consequences of further misconduct.
Concerning your contention of” discrimination there is no
evidence in the record to support it, and you submitted no eueky
evidence.

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,

WS Ren >
W. DEAN PFEINF
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04685-09

    Original file (04685-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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 19 December 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit and dereliction of duty.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04011-11

    Original file (04011-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2012. On 11 December 1990, you received the OTH discharge for misconduct (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 | CY2009 | 02730-09

    Original file (02730-09.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 20 August 1988, you received NIP for four instances of UA, and failure to go to your appointed placed of duty. On 22 August 1988 you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00731-09

    Original file (00731-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 June 1988, you received NUP for wrongful use of marijuana and UA. Additionally, after your third NUP, you were counseled and warned that further | misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.. On 27 June 1988, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Board.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00971 12

    Original file (00971 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2012. 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 so discharged on 7 May 1985.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06290-10

    Original file (06290-10.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. The separation authority 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 | CY2010 | 05982-10

    Original file (05982-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. On 24 June 1994 you received the OTH discharge due to misconduct (pattern of misconduct).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04237-09

    Original file (04237-09.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. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2008 | 02177-08

    Original file (02177-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 October 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. On 10 May 1985, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8344 13

    Original file (NR8344 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 9 September 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. on 20 August 1986, you received NUP for breaking restriction.