DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No: 03522-12
27 February 2013
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
deceased son’s 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 26 February 2013. 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, his 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.
Your entered active duty service in the Navy on 3 December 1982,
and ‘served without disciplinary incident until 26 May 1983, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for assault. Shortly
thereafter, you received the following NJP’s: on 2 July 1984, for
an unauthorized absence (UA); on 30 October 1984, for UA and a
general order violation; on 29 July 1985, for failure to go to
your appointed place of duty; on 16 August 1985, for breaking
restriction and failure to obey a lawful order; and on 19 August
1985, for wrongful use of controlled substances (codeine,
cocaine, and marijuana). You were recommended for separation
with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to a pattern of
misconduct. You waived your right to consult with counsel and an
administrative discharge board (ADB). The separation authority
approved the recommendation, and on 25 October 1985, you were
separated with an OTH discharge due to a pattern of misconduct
and an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of his entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your claim that you were an alcoholic and did not receive any
treatment. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change to your characterization of
service, due to your misconduct. Furthermore, the Board found
that you waived your right to consult with counsel and an ADB,
your best opportunity for retention, or a better characterization
of service. Finally, the Board found that none of your
misconduct was alcohol related. In view of the above, 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,
ly WeawS |
W. DEAN PF
Executive DYréctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08887-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 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 | CY2012 | 00207 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. On 9 March 1984, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | 04634-10
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in six NUPs. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08555-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 2009. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 17 July 1985, you had NUP for another unspecified period of UA and were warned that further infractions could result in an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00373-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4306 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in five NJPs and a civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02177-08
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 | CY2010 | 10405-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. On 26 December 1984, you were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09978-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2009. You were also counseled regarding this offense and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. On 8 January 1985, you had NJP for use of marijuana.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03355-09
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 8 September 1986, the discharge 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...