DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SUN
Docket No: 00303-13
17 October 2013
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 16
October 2013. 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 enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
27 December 1978. The Board found that during the period from
22 April 1980 to 9 February 1982, you received three nonjudicial
punishments (NJP‘’s) for two instances of being absent from your
appointed place of duty, disobedience, wrongful possession of two
brass pipes with marijuana residue and marijuana, and wrongful use,
possession, distribution and sale of marijuana, speed, cocaine,
hashish and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). Additionally, you were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of 42 days of unauthorized
absence (UA). Administrative discharge action was initiated by reason
of misconduct due to wrongful drug use. You elected to consult
counsel and have your case heard before an administrative discharge
board (ADB). On 8 June 1982, the ADB found you had committed
misconduct and recommended that you be retained on active duty.
However, on 16 July 1982, your commanding officer forwarded your case
concurring with the ADB finding of misconduct and despite the
recommendation for retention, he recommended that you receive an other
than honorable (OTH) discharge due to wrongful drug use. On 17 August
1982, the separation authority directed a general discharge due to
convenience of the government. On 3 November 1982, your separation
was held in abeyance until you were off light duty due to treatment
and a pending medical board. On 14 February 1983, a medical board
found you fit for duty and placed you on light duty for six months.
On 3 May 1983, the separation authority stated that the additional
limited duty authorization was inappropriate, and requested that
action be initiated for a medical board to conduct a reevaluation to
determine your fitness for separation. On 2 June 1983, your medical
board was completed and you were returned to your command. On 1 July
1983, you received a forth NJP for wrongful use of marijuana.
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason
of misconduct due to wrongful drug use. You waived your rights to
consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an ADB.
Your case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under OTH
conditions by reason of misconduct. Your commanding officer stated,
in part, that in spite of counseling, you continued to flaunt Navy-
wide initiatives to promote Zero Tolerance of substance abuse and that
your general discharge was held in abeyance pending resolution of your
limited duty status due to prolonged medical treatment. On 29 July
1983, the separation authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge
by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. You were so discharged on
9 August 1983.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of service,
post service accomplishments and desire to upgrade your discharge.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your four NJP’s,
three of which involved wrongful possession and use of drugs, and
conviction by SCM of a lengthy period of UA. Finally, the Board noted
that you waived the right to an ADB, your best chance for retention or
a better characterization of service. 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,
L> Boe Dax
W. DEAN PFEI
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00653-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2008. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your misconduct. 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 | CY2008 | 04935-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 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. The Board noted that as a result of your prior honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans' benefits.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08476-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. 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 | CY2013 | NR2489-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 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 .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04916-08
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 other than honorable (OTH) discharge and elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10122-07
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. During the period 12 November 1982 to 18 February 1983, you had three NUP's. 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 | CY2012 | 00207 12
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 March 1984, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | 03090-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00541 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23. 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6730 13
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 found that on 17 May 1982, you were counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant-to demonstrate...