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

	TJR
Docket No: 7502-07
3 June 2008

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 3 June 2008. 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 on 1 November 1989 at age 19. Nearly a year later, an investigation conducted during the period from 5 to 7 September 1990, reported that on 1 October 1989 you were arrested by civil authorities and charged with being under the influence of a controlled substance, specifically, phencycljdjne (PCP). As a result, on 18 January 1990, you were tried in civil court.

On 9 November 1990, following a review of the foregoing investigative report, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to administratively process you for separation due to your failure to disclose your pre-service misconduct, and to include any further offenses that you might have concealed and/or omitted at the time of enlistment. About a month later, on 5 December 1990, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of defective enlistment due to fraudulent entry as evidenced by your failure to reveal preservice civil involvement for the use and being under the influence of PCP. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to submit a statement of rebuttal to the separation. On 7 December 1990 your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions. On 12 December 1990
the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of fraudulent enlistment, and on 26 December 1990 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 and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also considered your assertion that you were given a discharge option because of your marital problems. It further considered your assertion of being ill-advised by a recruiter regarding your preservice civil involvement. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant an upgrade of your discharge because of the seriousness of your pre-service drug related misconduct and your failure to reveal the same. Further, you were given an opportunity to defend yourself against these charges, but waived your procedural rights. Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted none, to support your assertions. 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,

W.	DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director