DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN
Docket No: 09205-07
3 November 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, considered your
application on 28 October 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 and began a period of active duty on
12 March 1984 at age 19. On 5 March and 21 May 1985, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for wrongful use of marijuana,
disobedience, driving under the influence of alcohol, wrongful
appropriation of a motor vehicle, and altering a military
identification card.
On 21 May 1985, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious
offence. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a
statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board (ADB). Your commanding officer forwarded his recommendation
that you be discharged under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct, and on 7 June 1985, the discharge authority
directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct
due to commission of a serious offense. On 17 June 1985 you were
-So discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your two NUP’s, one of which was for
drug abuse. Further, you waived the right to an ADB, your best
chance for retention or a better characterization of service.
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,
Lode See.
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Ditéc
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06500-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 2009. 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. Shortly thereafter, on 24 August 1989, you received your third NUP for wrongful use of cocaine.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR462 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11198-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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. On 26 February 1992 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11351-07
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. 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 assertion that you no longer use drugs. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03627-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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. 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 | 04122-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2009. 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 8 June 1985, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct due...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08685-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 | CY2009 | 02216-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01318-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 Juiy 2009. 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. Shortly thereafter, on 10 January 1985, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04598-09
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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge processing. 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.