DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 7996-07
17 September 2008
4 4
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
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 16 September 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 23 July 1997 at age 21 and served for
two years and three months without disciplinary incident.
However, the record reflects that on 13 October 1999, your urine
sample tested positive for marijuana. As a result, on 17 March
2000, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use
of marijuana. The punishment imposed was restriction and extra
duty for 30 days, a reduction in paygrade, and a $1,000
forfeiture of pay, which was suspended for six months. On 30
March 2000 you again received NUP for wrongful use of marijuana
and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 30 days, a
reduction in paygrade, and a $1,000 forfeiture of pay.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative discharge
by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The discharge
authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct, and on 5 May 2000 you were so discharged and 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 and desire to have your reenlistment code changed so
that you may reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant a change of your
reenlistment code because of the seriousness of your repetitive
drug related misconduct which also resulted in an other than
honorable discharge. Further, an RE-4 reenlistment is required
when a Sailor is discharged under these conditions. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08752-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 June 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 prior service,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03673-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 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 | CY2007 | 08057-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 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. It also considered your post service psychiatric, mental, and/or medical evaluations and the character reference letters submitted in support of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08755-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2008. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service and assertion that you were recommended for retention by a review board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01749-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 August 2000. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative of this regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the serious Given all the nature of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00011-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2001. 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 | CY2008 | 01971-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 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 | CY2002 | 04835-01
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 The On 18 September 1984 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the serious nature of your repetitive drug use,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03811-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04489-05
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 19 December 1984 after four years of prior honorable service. On 18 May...