DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SMW
Docket No: 9332-06
1 March 2007

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 28 February 2007. 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 in] ustice.

On 28 January 1983 you enlisted in the Navy at age 21. During the period from 8 August to 9 September 1983 you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status on three occasions totaling about .a day. On 19 October 1983 you were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct, and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable discharge. On 26 October 1983 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for the three UA’s, disobedience of a lawful order, and use of marijuana. During the period from 21 February 1984 to 22 February 1985 you were UA on four more Occasions totaling about a day, but it appears that no disciplinary action was taken.

On 1 November 1985 and 30 January 1986 you received NJP for disobedience of a lawful order, a day of UA, and missing the movement of your ship. On 1 February 1986 you were counseled again regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct, and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable discharge. On 1 May 1986 you received NJP for a brief period of UA, and suspended punishment from the NJP of 30 January 1986 was vacated.

On 1 May 1986 your commanding officer (CO) initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, a pattern of misconduct and drug abuse. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than honorable discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 2 May 1986 a medical evaluation found that you were not drug dependent. On 13 May 1986 the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 18 June 1986 you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth. The Board also considered the letters of reference and your contention of an offense that led to your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your repetitive misconduct that continued even after you were warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable discharge. Finally, the Board noted that you waived the right to have your case heard by an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

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,

2