Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10135-06
Original file (10135-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                                    BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                             2 NAVY ANNEX
                                             WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


CRS
 Docket No: 10135-06
4 April 2008

This is in reference to your application for correction of your late husband’s 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 2 April 2008. 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 husband’s naval record ~nd applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
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.
The Board found that your husband enlisted in the Navy on 28 March 1988. on 27 and 29 June 1989 he received positive urinalyses for amphetamine/methamphetamine on two occasions, cocaine, and marijuana. He received two nonjudicial punishments for an unauthorized absence, failure to obey a lawful order, and possession and use of amphetamine/methamphetamine, cocaine, and marijuana.
On 4 August 1989 his commanding officer recommended that he be separated with a discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. When informed of the recommendation, he waived the right to present his case to an administrative discharge board. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 23 August 1989 he was separated with a discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct.





In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your husband’s youth, lack of
counseling, post-service conduct, disability and death, and the
contentions that he had symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder
(PTSD), and that the discharge does not reflect the true
 character of his service. The Board concluded that those factors are insufficient to warrant recharacteriZation of his discharge, given his repeated involvement with illegal drugs. Further, there is no credible evidence to show that he suffered from PTSD while in the Navy. In addition, there is no indication that he did not know right from wrong and was unable to adhere to the right. The Board did not accept your contention to the effect that he should have been separated or retired by reason of physical disability at the time of his discharge~ He would not have been entitled to disability separation or retirement in any case, as his administrative separation for misconduct would have taken precedence over disability evaluation processing. 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

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300425

    Original file (MD1300425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Clemency denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1427 13

    Original file (NR1427 13.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 7 May 1990, you received a second NJP for wrongful use of marijuana. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use.

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201294

    Original file (MD1201294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03619-06

    Original file (03619-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 August 1989 your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions byreason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Finally, the Board noted that you were given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8883 13

    Original file (NR8883 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 30 September 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09084-08

    Original file (09084-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2009, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 18 March 1991, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201276

    Original file (MD1201276.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. There is no indication in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02899-09

    Original file (02899-09.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. Therefore, you were recommended for separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to drug abuse, and you exercised your right to request an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06254-10

    Original file (06254-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 2010. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100205

    Original file (MD1100205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was separated from the Marine Corps on 25 July 2008 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct (Drug Abuse). The Applicant, as a combat veteran, is encouraged to contact the VA for more information at http://www4.va.gov/healtheligibility/Library/pubs/CombatVet/CombatVet.pdf or 1-877-222-VETS (8387).Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and discharge process, the...