DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
MTN
Docket No: 7230-14
28 July 2015
pear
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.
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute
of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
25 June 2014. 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 enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 15
February 1977. You reenlisted on 7 March 1983, serving over six
years of satisfactory service. On 9 November 1977, you received
a nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for two occasions of unauthorized
absence. On 27 January 1987, during a command directed
urinalysis, your urine sample tested positive for cocaine.
Subsequently, your commanding officer initiated administrative
discharge action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. You
elected to consult with legal counsel and appear before an
administrative discharge board (ADB). The ADB found that
although you had committed misconduct due to drug abuse, you
were recommended for retention. The commanding officer
disagreed with the ADB’s recommendation and subsequently
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On 26 March 1987, the
separation authority approved your discharge and you were so
discharged under honorable conditions on 9 April 1987.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to change your narrative reason for separation.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded this factor was not sufficient
to warrant recharacterization given your drug related
misconduct. The Board concluded the severity of your drug
related misconduct outweighed your desire to change your
narrative reason for separation. 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 within one year from the date of the Board’s
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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,
ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04074-08
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. On 11 March 1977, you were so discharged. 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 | 03615-10
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 | CY2010 | 06732-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 April 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 | CY2009 | 09659-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 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. You were counselled regarding this misconduct and advised that, although you were being retained, any further misconduct, especially drug related...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03533-10
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. On 22 June 1977 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to 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 | CY2013 | NR4768 13
A three-member: panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 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. Subsequently, your commanding officer, in concurrence with the ADB, also recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04313-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2013. 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 25 July 1986, you were briefed on the Navy’s policy on drug and alcohol abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06138-08
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. On 29 August 1984, you were also counseled regarding your misconduct, informed where substance abuse assistance was available, and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
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 | CY2006 | 07895-06
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.On 14 November 1985 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 27 after two periods of prior honorable service....