Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02601-08
Original file (02601-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 2601-08
20 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

19 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

On 7 April 1976, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On

28 September 1976, you had nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for

damaging non-government property and assault. On 30 September 1976,
you were convicted in civil court of second degree burglary. Your
sentence included a brief period of correctional custody, payment of
attorney fees, and restitution. On 6 December 1976, you began a
substance abuse program for alcohol addiction. On 12 July and

23 November 1977, you had NUP for two instances of unauthorized
absence (UA), breaking restriction, and possession of marijuana.

On 28 February 1978, a medical evaluation diagnosed you as being drug
dependent. On 6 March 1978, you were authorized substance abuse
treatment. On 7 March 1978, you had NUP for use of phencyclidine
(PCP) and being incapacitated for the proper performance of your
duties. On 14 April 1978, you began a period of UA while you were
undergoing treatment at the Navy Drug Rehabilitation Center. At that
time, you were dropped from treatment and not recommended for further
treatment. On 23 May 1978, you surrendered after being in a UA
status for about 39 days. On 30 May 1978, you were convicted by a
summary court-martial of the 39 day period of UA.

On 29 June 1978, 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 other than honorable (OTH) discharge and waived the right to
have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
23 August 1978, the separation authority approved the separation
recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct
due to drug abuse. On 30 June 1978, 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 the letters of character reference that you
submitted with your petition and your belief that your discharge
would change after six months. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct.
Furthermore, there is no provision in the law or regulations that
allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of
time. 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.

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,

\s )

W. DEAN
Executive D x

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 | CY2007 | 10172-07

    Original file (10172-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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). ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02648-08

    Original file (02648-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03870-10

    Original file (03870-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, reguiations, 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 | 03608-09

    Original file (03608-09.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 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. At that time you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03877-09

    Original file (03877-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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. On 9 November 1990, administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01905-07

    Original file (01905-07.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 9 July 1976, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. On 1 May 1979, in connection with the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06728-08

    Original file (06728-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 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 12 September 1978, you were given a retention warning and informed that further misconduct may not only result in disciplinary action, but an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR303 13

    Original file (NR303 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 16 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. Administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use.