Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06295-06
Original file (06295-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                                    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                   BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 SMW
 Docket No: 6295-06
3 November 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. sittinq in executive session, considered your application on 1 November 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 injsutice.
On 7 December 1983 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18 and served without incident until 24 August 1985, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order. On 26 September 1985 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCH) of possession of drug paraphernalia and possession of marijuana.
On 21 October 1985 your commanding officer initiated administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse or commission of a serious offense. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than honorable discharge and elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). A substance abuse evaluation of 29 October 1985 found that you were not drug dependent and recommended discharge. On 4 November 1985 an ADB unanimously found that you were guilty of misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense, and recommended an other than honorable discharge. On 31 January 1986 the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, and on 10 February 1986 you were so discharged. At that time you were assigned separation and reenlistment codes of GKK and RE-4. The RE-4 reenlistment code means that you are neither eligible nor recommended for reenlistment.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to change the separation code, reason for separation, reenlistment code or warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your drug-related misconduct. In this regard, the Board found that you met all requirements established by regulations for an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and assignment of a GKK separation code. Finally, regulations require assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals who are discharged by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no changes are 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 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 | CY2010 | 09088-10

    Original file (09088-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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 | CY2009 | 02574-09

    Original file (02574-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Recotds, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In March 1988 a second Navy Mental Health evaluation was conducted and you were diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity syndrome, tinea pedis, and alcohol dependence, and directed to complete your confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03635-08

    Original file (03635-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 May 1986, administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On 23 August 1986 the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason 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 | 12218-09

    Original file (12218-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 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. 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 | CY2011 | 04244-11

    Original file (04244-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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. 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 | 07895-06

    Original file (07895-06.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.On 14 November 1985 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 27 after two periods of prior honorable service....

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10642-10

    Original file (10642-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval | Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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. Conseguently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01931-10

    Original file (01931-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02039-05

    Original file (02039-05.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 Marine Corps on 24 October 1983 at age 18. On 1 March 1985 and 4 April 1986, you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10112-10

    Original file (10112-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 23 October 1986, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct for drug abuse (use).