DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 7253-01
5 April 2002
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 2 April 2002. 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.
The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 9 February 1983 at
the age of 19. Your record reflects that you served for a year
without disciplinary incident but on 29 March 1984 you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of marijuana and
were awarded a $200 forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra
duty for 30 days. During the period from 1 May to 17 October
1984 you received NJP on three other occasions for two
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order and wrongful use
of a controlled substance.
On 22 October 1984 you were you were notified of pending
administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to
drug abuse. After consulting with legal counsel you submitted a
letter of rebuttal to the discharge. On 4 January 1985 your
commanding officer recommended you be separated by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse. However, on 18 January 1985, the
discharge authority directed your commanding officer to
administratively reprocess you for separation by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense,
and to afford you the right to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 8 February 1985 you
were again notified of pending administrative separation action
by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a
serious offense. After consulting with legal counsel you elected
to present your case to an ADB. On 4 March 1985 an ADB
recommended you be issued a general discharge by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse. On 17 March 1985 your commanding
officer also recommended you be issued a general discharge. On
26 March 1985 the discharge authority approved the foregoing
recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of
misconduct, and on 2 April 1985 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 and immaturity, and your contention that you would
like your discharge upgraded to fully honorable so that you may
receive state health benefits. However, the Board concluded
these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the serious
nature of your repetitive misconduct which resulted in four NJPs,
two of which were for drug abuse. Further, individuals
discharged by reason of misconduct normally receive discharges
under other than honorable conditions. Accordingly, you were
fortunate to receive a general discharge. Given all the
circumstances of your case, the Board concluded your discharge
was proper and no change is warranted. 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 a t t ~ c h ~ c to 3 1 1 n f f i ~i a1 rernrds.
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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06958-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2 0 0 2 . 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 21 December 1983 your commanding officer recommended you be separated under okher than honorable conditions due to drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07506-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 3 May 2 0 0 3 . 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 served for a year without disciplinary incident, but on 3 1 December 1 9 8 1 , you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for dereliction in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06976-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2003. 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. )tI~t~ro wljo utatj ht~ Iottort~tl liii tio pr~t’nri~ fljat ~ctuin~i bt’t~n f~untl umrtI~; to itt’ numltt’rt’ti aa nut’ of (~)ur ~ratat~ $1~1t1tttrko.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06881-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2002. The recommendations of the medical board were to attempt to control the cluster headaches through medication and a six month period of limited duty. Additionally the Board considered the statements of your commanding officer concerning his investigation, your personal letter written concerning your positive urinalysis test and the fact that you were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06134-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. * You were advanced to RM3 (E-4), extended your enlistment for an additional period of four months, and served without further incident until 15 March 1982, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for use of marijuana. Counsel also noted that the senior member of the ADB was not an 0-4 line officer.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06854-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2002. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 02329-00
The discharge authority approved the ADB recommendation and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions. -- -- h. On 8 March 1990, Petitioner appeared with counsel before the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) . The NDRB found Petitioner to be credible and candid in his testimony and believed the circumstances described by Petitioner had occurred.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08643-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2002. On 6 October 1977 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reasion of misconduct due to civil conviction. 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 | CY2003 | 01323-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2003. However, on 3 October 1985 you were dropped from this counseling due to your non-amenability to treatment. 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 | CY1999 | 02900-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 1999. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 9 December 1996, the Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for changes in the characterization of service and the reason for discharge.