Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00776-06
Original file (00776-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00

         TJR
                                                                                          Docket No: 776-06
                                                                                         20 September 2006








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 19 September 2006. 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 Marine Corps on 29 December 1982 at age 28 and served for nearly a year without disciplinary incident. However, on 22 December 1983, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 13 days.

On 28 March 1984 and again on 30 July 1985 you received NJP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and being incapacitated for duty due to intoxication.

On 18 March 1986 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of wrongful use of marijuana. You were sentenced to restriction for 60 days, reduction to paygrade E-2, and a forfeiture of pay. Shortly thereafter, on 28 March 1986, you submitted a written statement in which you admitted to participating in homosexual conduct.

On 8 April 1986 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board. Subsequently, your commanding officer recommended a discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and further stated that your voluntary disclosure to homosexual involvement should also be taken into consideration regarding your administrative separation. On 21 May 1986 the discharge authority directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, and on 23 May 1986 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 assertion that current rules and guidelines should be applied to your case and your discharge should be upgraded accordingly. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which resulted in three NJPs and a court-martial conviction, and included drug abuse. Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you have submitted none, to support your assertion that under current rules and guidelines you would receive a better characterization of service. 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,



         W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

























2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR12070 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2015. 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 Board, in its review of your entire record and application with supporting documentation, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3458 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR3458 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2015. Documentary materia considered by the Board ¢ your application, together with all material submitted in support a : = thereof, your naval Tecora, anda 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03822-07

    Original file (03822-07.rtf) 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.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 on 8 November 1983 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00229

    Original file (ND01-00229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600 A personal appearance hearing discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010420. After a thorough review of the testimony, records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The counsel for the applicant presented six issues for the Board’s...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11109-06

    Original file (11109-06.rtf) 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.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 on 23 October 1984 at age 20 and served about four months without...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05711-06

    Original file (05711-06.rtf) 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.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 reenlisted in the Navy on 22 June 1981 after eight years of prior honorable service. On 11...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14

    Original file (NR12070 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2015.. Asa result, you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug under other ‘than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, which was in direct Gisregard to the Navy's ‘Zero Tolerance’ Policy, and conviction by civil authorities for possession of marijuana. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07545-05

    Original file (07545-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2006. 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 | CY2006 | 08586-06

    Original file (08586-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 July 2007. 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 | CY2006 | 04802-06

    Original file (04802-06.rtf) 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.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 reenlisted in the Navy on 31 October 1980 at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On...