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

SMW
Docket No: 8553-07
30 May 2008

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 29 May 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 th~ existence of probable material error or injustice.

On 2 February 1982, you enlisted in the Navy at age 22 and served without incident for more than 32 months. On 20 October 1984, you were counseled regarding your use of illegal drugs and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or administrative separation. On 22 October 1984, you were hospitalized due to a drug overdose. You were subsequently recommended to receive marriage counseling and assistance at the Family Service Center. On 11 December 1984, you were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct and warned Chat further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable (0TH) discharge. During the period
11 January to 23 May 1985, you had three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for failure to go to your appointed place of duty, two instances of writing checks with insufficient funds, a day of unauthorized absence (UA), and use of marijuana. In addition, suspended punishment from the NJP dated 11 January 1985, was vacated. On 30 May 1985, you received a medical evaluation, during which you admitted using marijuana and further stated that you had marital discord since 1984. On 3 June 1985, a service record entry was made which stated that you were disqualified from submarine duty due to being unreliable.

On 3 June 1985, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an 0TH discharge and elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 25 August 1985, you began a period of UA. On 26 August 1985, while you were absent, an ADB convened and found that you were guilty of misconduct due to drug abuse and recommended an 0TH discharge. On 12 September 1985, about 18 days later, your UA ended when you were apprehended by military authorities. On 25 October 1985, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed an 0TH discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On 1 November 1985, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your period of good service. The Board also considered your contention that personal problems may have attributed to your misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct. Regarding your contention, personal problems do not excuse misconduct. 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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
							 Executive Director