Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00440-08
Original file (00440-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 440-08
28 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 27 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material

error or injustice.

On 5 May 1983, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 26 after two
prior periods of honorable service. On 24 August 1983, your
urinalysis tested positive for cocaine. On 22 December 1983,
you were convicted by a special court-martial of use of
cocaine. On 23 December 1983, you began an unauthorized
absence (UA) that ended on 27 December 1983, a period of about
four days. On 3 January 1984, you had nonjudicial punishment
for absence from your appointed place of duty. You were also

counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and
conduct and warned that further infractions could result in an
other than honorable (OTH) discharge. You subsequently began
drug rehabilitation. On 22 February 1984, you acknowledged

completing drug rehabilitation and certified that you
understood that residential drug rehabilitation was a one time

opportunity and that return to drug abuse would be grounds for
a punitive or OTH discharge. Based on the information
currently contained in the record, it appears that your
urinalysis subsequently tested positive for marijuana.

On 9 April 1984, your commanding officer initiated
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug
abuse. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged
that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the
right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board (ADB). On 27 April 1984, the separation authority
approved the discharge recommendation and directed an OTH

discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On
3 May 1984, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your prior
periods of honorable service. The Board also considered your
contention that personal problems contributed to your
misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct that
continued even after you received drug rehabilitation and were
warned that further infractions could result in an OTH
discharge. Regarding your contention, personal problems do not
excuse misconduct. The Board also 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.

The Board 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07886-08

    Original file (07886-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00102-09

    Original file (00102-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 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. It was recommended that you be retained on active duty and warned that further misconduct of drug use could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06169-07

    Original file (06169-07.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 7 September 1982, you reenlisted in the Naval Reserve at age 27 after a prior period of honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08363-08

    Original file (08363-08.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 22 September, 5 October, and 10 October 1983, your urinalyses tested positive for marijuana. The Board noted that as a result of your prior periods of honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans' benefits.

  • 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 | CY2006 | 05227-06

    Original file (05227-06.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 19 May 1980 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On 26...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06704-08

    Original file (06704-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • 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 | 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 | 04060-08

    Original file (04060-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard...