Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06169-07
Original file (06169-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100





 SMW
 Docket No: 6169-07
5 March 2008






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, considere d YOUX application on 5 March 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.
On 7 September 1982, you reenlisted in the Naval Reserve at age
27 after a prior period of honorable service in the Navy, Naval
Reserve, and Army National Guard. On 23 February 1983, you began
a period of active service. On 27 September 1984, your
 urinalysis tested positive for tetrahydrocannabjno~ (THC), and on
22 October 1984, you referred yourself for drug abuse. On
22 October 1984, you had nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for use of
a controlled substance. On 24 October 1984, your urinalysis
tested positive for THC. On 19 November 1984, suspended
punishment from the NJP was vacated. On 16 January 1985 you
completed residential alcohol and drug rehabilitation treatment.
On 17 April 1985, your urinalysis tested positive for THC. On
22 May 1985, your urinalysis tested positive for amphetamines and
THC.
On 23 May 1985, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and convenience of the government due to alcohol and drug rehabilitation failure. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than
 honorable (0TH) discharge and elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (AIDE). On 27 June 1985, an ADB convened and recommended an 0TH discharge after finding that you were guilty of misconduct due to drug abuse and an alcohol and drug rehabilitation failure. The separation authority found an error in the ADB member composition and directed reconvening of a new ADB. However, on 6 August 1985, you waived the right to have your case heard by an ADB. On 10 September 1985, the separation authority approved the separation recommendation and directed an 0TH discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On 12 September 1985, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth and periods of honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your repetitive drug-related misconduct. Finally, although your case was heard by an ADB, you later waived the right to have your case heard by another ADB, which was 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. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The Board also noted that as a result of your prior periods of honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans’ benefits. You should contact the nearest office of the Department of Veterans Affairs if you desire clarification about your eligibility for those benefits.
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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04399-07

    Original file (04399-07.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.On 19 September 1983, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. In connection with this processing, you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2474-13

    Original file (NR2474-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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 existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06985-07

    Original file (06985-07.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.On 16 October 1980, you reenlisted in the Marine Corps at age 27 after two prior periods of honorable...

  • 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 | 09978-08

    Original file (09978-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2009. You were also counseled regarding this offense and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. On 8 January 1985, you had NJP for use of marijuana.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02384-07

    Original file (02384-07.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.On 10 April 1981, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19 and served without incident for more than 34...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08553-07

    Original file (08553-07.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 th~ existence of probable material error or injustice.On 2 February 1982, you enlisted in the Navy at age 22 and served without incident for more than 32...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04498-08

    Original file (04498-08.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 2 October 1985, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The Board also noted that your case was initially heard by an ADB, which recommended a general discharge, but that action was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05353-06

    Original file (05353-06.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 10 September ±982 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 18 and served without incident for about...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6905 13

    Original file (NR6905 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 22 July 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 existence of probable...