Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03856-07
Original file (03856-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 3856-07

20 February 2008

 

reference to your application for corréction of your

This is in referen .
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 20 February 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 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 31 January 2001 at age 20. A year
and three months later, on 1 April 2002, you submitted a written
statement regarding your drug use prior to enlistment, and in-
service drug use while serving in Rota, Spain. Your record
contains an administrative remarks entry dated 11 April 2002
which states, in part, that you were diagnosed as drug dependent,
recommended for participation in a drug rehabilitation program, ‘
and strongly opposed treatment. On 11 June 2002 you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of hashish and
ecstasy. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade E-1,
restriction and extra duty for 45 days, and a forfeiture of pay.

Subsequently, 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 (ADB).
On 24 June 2002 your commanding officer recommended an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

This recommendation stated, in part, as follows:
(Member) admitted to the illegal use of hashish and ecstasy
on multiple occasions.... received NUP.... not keeping with
Navy’s policy of ‘zero tolerance’ of drug abuse.... due to

his extensive drug abuse, I feel he has no potential for

further service.

The discharge authority approved the foregoing recommendation and
directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of drug abuse, and on 2 July 2002 you were so discharged.
At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and desire to change your
reenlistment code so that you may reenlist in the armed forces.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your repetitive drug related
misconduct and refusal to participate ina rehabilitation
program. Finally, you were given an opportunity to defend
yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case
to an ADB. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

The Board also noted that you are entitled to submit the attached
Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the
Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 293) to the Naval
Council of Personnel Boards, attention: Naval Discharge Review
Board, 720 Kennon Street, S. E., Room 309, Washington Navy Yard,
Washington, DC 20374-5023 for consideration of an upgrade of your
discharge and a change in your narrative reason for discharge.

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 P
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01143-07

    Original file (01143-07.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 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 naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08983-06

    Original file (08983-06.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 12 November 2002 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. During the NJP proceedings, you admitted that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06493-07

    Original file (06493-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03814-07

    Original file (03814-07.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 3 January 1982 the discharge authority directed discharge under honorable conditions by reason of drug abuse. 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 | CY2007 | 03883-07

    Original file (03883-07.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 9 September 1977 at age 17 and served for seven months without...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01701-10

    Original file (01701-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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 | CY2009 | 09598-09

    Original file (09598-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, desire to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06109-01

    Original file (06109-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The punishment imposed was a $400 Your record further reflects that on 14 May 1984 you received NJP for 20 specifications of wrongful possession of marijuana and were awarded extra duty for 45 days, a reduction in rate, and a $600 forfeiture of pay. Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board However, the Board concluded these factors and The Board noted that you submitted no evidence to and the records contains no such Accordingly, your application has been denied. Consequently,...

  • 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 | CY2010 | 00557-10

    Original file (00557-10.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. On 20 April 1988, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct for drug abuse. 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.