DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 9112-07
6 November 2008
This igs 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 5 November 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 31 October 1988 after nearly four
years of prior honorable service. You continued to serve without
disciplinary incident until 18 June 1990, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for disrespect and failure to obey a
lawful order.
On 8 April 1993 you received NUP for wrongful use of amphetamine
and methaphetamine. The punishment imposed was a $1,260
forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, and
reduction to paygrade E-3. On 16 April 1993 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 29 April 1993 your commanding officer
recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse. On 24 May 1993 the discharge
authority approved this recommendation, and on 1 June 1993, 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 the
passage of time, your prior honorable service, and your desire to
upgrade your discharge and change your reenlistment code so that
you may reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge or a’ change to your reenlistment code because of your
drug related misconduct. Further, you were given an opportunity
to defend yourself, but waived your procedural rights to present
your case to an ADB. Finally, an RE-4 reenlistment code is
authorized by regulatory guidance and must be assigned to Sailors
who are discharged by reason of misconduct. 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,
\aQeeS
W. DEAN PFEIRF
Executive Dikeéct
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09004-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, ‘sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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. Further, in accordance with Navy regulations, Sailors discharged by reason of misconduct must receive an RE-4 reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04035-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 February 2013. 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 14 April 1994, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct (drug abuse).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03843-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to one in Favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02718-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. On § March 1993, you received the OTH discharge due to misconduct for drug abuse (use)).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07802-07
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the RE-4 reenlistment code or recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct. Furthermore, regulations do not require a second urinalysis to discharge a member by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03793-10
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of one NUP and conviction by SCM of drug abuse and misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08452-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03856-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2008. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03335-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 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 | CY2007 | 03985-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 2008. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...