Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01935-10
Original file (01935-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
, 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 01935-10
18 November 2010

 

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 17 November 2010. 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.

You reenlisted in the Navy on 4 March 1982. On 8 July 1982, you
Signed a Statement of Awareness regarding the Navy’s drug policy
of zero tolerance. On 14 September 1983, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for the wrongful possession and use
of marijuana. On 17 June 1983, you received NUP for being in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status. On 27 June 1983, you were
convicted by civilian criminal authorities of failure to appear,
wearing of headset or earplugs, driving without a valid drivers
license, driving under the influence, hit and run, and causing
property damage. You were sentenced to a fine of $600, ordered
to attend alcohol rehabilitation center, and your driver's
license was restricted for 90 days. On 13 October 1983, you
received your third NJP for an additional UA period. On

22 December 1983, administrative discharge action was initiated
by reason of misconduct (drug abuse). On 13 January 1984, a
mental health evaluation was conducted and you were found to be
psychologically dependent on marijuana. You waived all of your
procedural rights, including your right to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). Your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
4

 

conditions (OTH) by reason of misconduct (drug abuse). The
discharge authority directed the OTH discharge. On 27 January
1984, you received the OTH discharge due to misconduct (drug
abuse). At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment

code.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and prior

‘honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these

factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason or
“éharacterization of: your discharge given your record of three
NJP's for misconduct and drug abuse (use). The Board noted that
%ou waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity fer
retention or a better characterization of service. An RE-4
reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged
due to misconduct such as drug abuse. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request.

The Board believes that you may be eligible for veterans’
benefits that accrued during your first period of service.
Whether or not you are eligible for benefits based on this period
of service is a matter under the cognizance of the Department of
Veterans Affairs (DVA). If you have been denied benefits, you
should appeal that denial under procedures established by the
DVA.

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,

Rue eed

W. DEAN PF F
Executive Dine

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1879-13

    Original file (NR1879-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY1999 | 05428-09

    Original file (05428-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2010. You received the OTH discharge on 25 June 1984 for misconduct (drug abuse), and were assigned an RE- 4 reenlistment code. 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 | CY2011 | 00830-11

    Original file (00830-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2011. You exercised your procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2011 | 04960-11

    Original file (04960-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08230-07

    Original file (08230-07.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. In your application, you are requesting that your record be corrected to show that you were discharged in June 1986 vice the discharge of 6 June 1985 now of record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09224-09

    Original file (09224-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse). 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 | CY2010 | 00042-10

    Original file (00042-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TAL Docket No: 042-10 12 October 2010 ee. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2010. @pnsequently, 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 | CY2008 | 02669-08

    Original file (02669-08.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. On 6 November 1984, you were discharged with an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09810-10

    Original file (09810-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 June 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2007 | 08384-07

    Original file (08384-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 December 1984, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On 26 December 1984 your late husband was. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of his discharge because of the frequency of his misconduct, as shown by the two NJP’s, one of which was for drug use, the SPCM conviction for drug use, and his failure to adhere to his command’s drug rehabilitation program.