Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04122-08
Original file (04122-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 4122-08
16 January 2009

 

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

14 January 2009. 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 13 September 1982, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. During

the period 2 June 1983 to 21 August 1984, you were in an unauthorized
absence (UA) status on six occasions totaling about 11 days. On

24 August 1984, you had nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for assault
consummated by battery and a three day period of UA. Based on the
information currently contained in the record, it appears that no
disciplinary action was taken for the other periods of UA. On

16 September 1984, you were in a UA status for more than an hour.

On 30 November 1984, you had NUP for two instances of disobedience of
a lawful order and suspended punishment was vacated from your prior
NIP. On 4 December 1984, your urinalysis tested positive for
cocaine. You subsequently received a medical evaluation during which
you denied use of cocaine. The evaluation stated that you were not
dependent and recommended administrative separation.

On 7 January 1985, your commanding officer initiated administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, but was
subsequently advised to reprocess your administrative separation.
During the period 11 to 14 January 1985, you were in a UA status, but
no disciplinary action was taken. On 26 March 1985, your commanding
officer initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct
due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense. In connection
with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result
in an other than honorable (OTH) discharge and elected to have your
case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On

14 May 1985, an ADB convened and found misconduct by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense, and
recommended a general characterization of service. On 8 June 1985,
the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and
directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. On 14 June 1985, you were so
discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to
the seriousness of your misconduct. 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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2002 | 04182-02

    Original file (04182-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2002. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, 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. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08039-08

    Original file (08039-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the .

  • 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 | CY2010 | 03038-10

    Original file (03038-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 7itting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. On 5 December 1994 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reaton of misconduct due to commission of a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09332-06

    Original file (09332-06.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 in] ustice.On 28 January 1983 you enlisted in the Navy at age 21. During the period from 21 February 1984 to 22...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00183-11

    Original file (00183-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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 | 02384-07

    Original file (02384-07.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 10 April 1981, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19 and served without incident for more than 34...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04888 12

    Original file (04888 12.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 March 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 17 July 1986, you began a period of UA that at lasted nine days, ending on 10 August 1986.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07253-01

    Original file (07253-01.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 April 2002. However, on 18 January 1985, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to administratively reprocess you for separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense, and to afford you the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 4 March 1985 an ADB recommended you be...