DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No: 10882-07
21 August 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 20 August 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 28 January 1969, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On
21 May 1970, a Naval Investigative Service (NIS) investigation
resulted in your implication of being involved with illegal
drugs. On 29 June 1970, your commanding officer initiated
administrative separation by reason of unfitness. In
connection with this processing, you acknowledged that
separation could result in an undesirable discharge (UD),
elected counsel, waived the right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB), and submitted a statement
requesting a general discharge. On 7 August 1970, your
commanding officer stated that you were implicated by three
other Sailors as being involved with illegal drugs, but you
declined to make a statement when questioned by NIS. On
9 September 1970, the separation authority approved the
discharge recommendation, but directed a general discharge by
reason of unfitness. On 16 September 1970, you were so
discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth.
The Board also considered your contention that you never did
drugs. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors and
contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge. The Board noted that you waived the right to
have your case heard by an ADB, 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.
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,
TS, a
FOAR_W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06771-06
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 August 1967 at age 20. However, the board found that these factors...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00715-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 June 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 26 August 1970, an administrative discharge board (ADB) unanimously recommended that you be separated with a general discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04805-01
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. Your allegations of error and 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. recommended you be issued a general discharge by reason of unfitness...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00566-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 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 | CY2007 | 07225-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 January 2008. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice, The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 16 March 2004. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07895-06
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 14 November 1985 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 27 after two periods of prior honorable service....
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02642-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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 24 November 1971, you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2910-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given your NUP,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1879-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 January 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11330-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all, material gubmitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. As a result of the NIS investigation, you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of five specifications of indecent assault against female Marines, peeping through a window of a Female Marine, looking into the bathroom of a female Marine, and unlocking a bathroom door and peeping...