DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TOR
Docket No: 733-11
21 October 2011
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 18 October 2011. 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.
You reenlisted in the Navy Reserve on 10 January 2007 after
nearly nine years of prior honorable service. You continued to
gerve without disciplinary incident until 2 July 2008, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NOP) for wrongful use of
amphetamines. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade
E-4, restriction for 60 days, anda $2,135.10 forfeiture of pay.
Subsequently, you were administratively processed for separation
by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The discharge
authority directed separation under other than honorable
conditions and on 23 July 2008, while serving in paygrade E-4,
you were so discharged. At that time you were not recommended
For reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record, to include the
Naval Discharge Review Board decisional document, and
application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as
your prior satisfactory service, post service conduct, and desire
to upgrade your discharge. It also considered the statements and
evidence provided in support of your case. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded the evidence and materials submitted were not
sufficient to warrant any favorable action given the seriousness
of your drug related misconduct which was contrary to the Navy's
“zero tolerance” policy regarding drug use. 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 E
Executive [Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03702-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 | CY2007 | 03673-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 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 | CY2007 | 07996-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 2008. On 30 March 2000 you again received NUP for wrongful use of marijuana and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 30 days, a reduction in paygrade, and a $1,000 forfeiture of pay. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07948-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 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. In this regard, mental problems are not an excuse for misconduct, and disciplinary action and administrative separation were appropriate in your case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09530-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 July 2008 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11634-10
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08759-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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 | CY2007 | 09112-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the passage of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03856-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2008. The Board also noted that you are entitled to submit the attached Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 293) to the Naval Council of Personnel Boards, attention: Naval Discharge Review Board, 720 Kennon Street, S. E., Room 309, Washington Navy Yard, Washington, DC 20374-5023 for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 08281-11
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. The record further reflects that you were to be processed for an administrative separation due to the imposition of the NUP. Nonetheless, the record does not reflect such action.