DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BUG
Docket No: 8227-13
5 September 2014
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 4 September 2014. 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. In addition, the Board considered the
report of the Naval Discharge Review Board, dated 25 June 1993,
a copy of which is attached.
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. —
You enlisted.in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 26
October 1979. You received nonjudicial punishment for the
wrongful use of marijuana. + You also tested positive ina
urinalysis for the wrongful use of marijuana for which no
disciplinary action was taken. You were then advised that your
command was processing you for administrative separation with an
other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to
misconduct (drug abuse - use). You waived your procedural right
to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board
(ADB). On 15 August 1984, you received the OTH characterization
of service due to misconduct (drug abuse - use), and were
assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment
code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully
considered all potentially mitigating factors, such as your
youth, family problems, remorse, post service good conduct, and
current desire to upgrade your discharge. The Board concluded,
however, that your discharge should not be changed due to your
drug abuse. The Boarq noted that you waived the right to an
"ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
icharacterization of*service. You are advised that no discharge
is upgraded based merely on the passage of time or post service
good conduct. In view of the above, 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,
OBERT?’J. O’NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8229 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2014. You also tested positive six times in urinalyses for the wrongful use of marijuana for which no disciplinary action was taken. 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 | CY2013 | NR6338 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. You were then notified that you were being administratively separated with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to misconduct (drug abuse). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2474-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3241-13
| A three-member panel of the Board for Correction-of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 4 February 2014. On 21 March 1986, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) 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 | CY2013 | NR7753 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 19 August 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 | CY2013 | NR6625 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 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. You were then advised that your command was administratively separating you with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7911 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 29 July 2014. On 11 May 1984, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse (use)), and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3827-13
of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2014. the Board consisted ‘of your application, together with all material submitted. 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 | CY2014 | NR3171 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 2 December 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrati regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of t Board. Your commanding officer then recommended you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse - use).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6635 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2014. You were then advised that your command was administratively separating you with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service 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.