DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 6469-08
21 May 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 12 May 2009. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 19 August 1987 you signed pre-enlistment documents in which
you stated, in part, that you had used marijuana. Although a
waiver for enlistment was not required, you were advised that any
future drug involvement would result in an administrative
separation.
You enlisted in the Navy on 21 August 1987 at age 17 and began a
period of active duty on 19 January 1988. You served without
disciplinary infraction until 8 February 1988, when, as a result
of a urinalysis, you were identified as a drug abuser.
On 30 August 1990 you received nonjudicial punishment (NOP) for a
Four day period of unauthorized absence (UA). About a month
later, on 27 September 1990 you received NJP for wrongful use of
marijuana. Shortly thereafter, on 30 September 1990, you were
notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse. At that time you waived your right
to consult with légal counsel and to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 7 October 1990 your
commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge
by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. This recommendation
stated, in part, that your urine tested positive on two
occasions, you did not object to being discharged, your drug use
adversely affected combat readiness and could not be tolerated,
and your presence onboard was prejudicial to good order,
discipline, and morale.
On 29 November 1990 you received your third NUP for failure to
obey a lawful order, drunk and disorderly conduct, and
communicating a threat. On 1 December 1990 you were referred for
a medical evaluation due to drug use, specifically, marijuana and
barbiturates. You were found not to be physiologically
dependent, but psychologically dependent on marijuana. You were
recommended for further evaluation at a Navy counselling and
assistance center and for an administrative discharge. Shortly
thereafter, on 5 December 1990, the discharge authority approved
the recommendations for discharge, and on 14 January 1991 you
were issued an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also considered
your assertions that you were not addicted to any drugs, made the
mistake of using marijuana while on liberty, and was discharged
two days prior to your expiration of enlistment. The Board
further considered your assertion that if you were such a
detriment to the Navy, you should not have been held by Navy
authorities for five months after your positive urinalysis.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your repetitive drug related
misconduct. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend
yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case
to an ADB. Finally, the Board concluded that your record
contains documented evidence that is contrary to your assertions.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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 P
Executive etor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12560 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2012. 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 poliedes . 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 | CY2011 | 04658-11
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 15 October 1987 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct and on 27 October 1987 you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03991-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 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 | CY2010 | 05647-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2006 | 11064-06
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 12 September 1986 after four years of prior honorable service. As a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11133-06
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 Marine Corps on 18 September 1986 at age 27 and served for nearly two years...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01157-11
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 7 August 1989 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00870-01
870-01 24 January 2002 Dear Mr.- This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. considered your application on Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 16 January 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 3...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04720-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 March 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 | CY2011 | 04651-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2012. 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...