Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05227-06
Original file (05227-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



 SMW
 Docket No: 5227-06
4 October 2006



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 3 October 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.
On 19 May 1980 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On 17 December 1980 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two brief periods of unauthorized absence (UA), two instances of failure to obey a lawful order, possession of marijuana, dereliction in the performance of your duties, and resisting apprehension. You were counseled on that same date due to your drug abuse and advised that further infractions could result in administrative separation. On 18 December 1980 a drug abuse disposition message stated that you were not drug dependent, and had not been granted a drug exemption.
On 18 December 1980 you began a period of UA that ended on 2
January 1981, a period of about 15 days. On 2 January 1981 you
 began another UA that ended on 12 January 1981, a period of about 10 days. On 11 February 1981 you received NJP for both of these UA’s that totaled about 25 days. On 16 March 1982 you received NJP for failure to obey a lawful order.
You then served without incident until 15 February 1983, when a urinalysis tested positive for use of marijuana. On 26 April 1983 a urinalysis tested positive for use of marijuana and amphetamines, and on 28 July 1983 a urinalysis tested positive for use of cocaine.
On 26 August 1983 your commanding officer initiated separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than honorable discharge, and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 23 September 1983 a substance abuse report stated that you had no potential for further service and recommended administrative separation. On 3 October 1983 your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge. On 18 October 1983 the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 26 October 1983 you were so discharged, and an RE-4 reenlistment code was assigned.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and prior period of honorable service. The Board also considered your contention that individuals with worse misconduct did not receive such a bad reenlistment code. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, most of which was drug-related, and continued even after you were warned that further infractions could result in an administrative separation. The Board also noted that you waived the right to have your case heard by an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted. Additionally, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged by reason of 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.




2


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.
The Board noted that as a result of your prior honorable service, you may be eligible for veteran’s benefits. You should contact the Department of Veterans Affairs if you desire clarification about your eligibility for those benefits.


                                                               Sincerely


W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
                                                                                

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08363-08

    Original file (08363-08.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 22 September, 5 October, and 10 October 1983, your urinalyses tested positive for marijuana. The Board noted that as a result of your prior periods of honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans' benefits.

  • 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00070-08

    Original file (00070-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. 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 | 04684-06

    Original file (04684-06.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00440-08

    Original file (00440-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct that continued even after...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06134-00

    Original file (06134-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 10581-10

    Original file (10581-10.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of one conviction by a SPCM, and four NUP’s for drug abuse and misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02585-08

    Original file (02585-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2008. The Board noted that as a result of your prior period of honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans' benefits. 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 | NR2489-13

    Original file (NR2489-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00438 12

    Original file (00438 12.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 requested to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), and then later waived your right. 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.