DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TJR
Docket No: 4801-01
9 November 2001
.-.
-..
.
-
-.I._
___-__.
Dear
This is in reference to your
naval record pursuant to the
States Code, Section 1552.
application for correction of your
provisions of Title 10, United
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 November 2001.
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.
Your allegations of error and
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.
The Board found you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 10 July 1968
at the age of 18.
Your record reflects that you served for two
years without disciplinary incident but on 16 July 1970 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your
appointed place of duty and were awarded restriction for seven
days.
NJP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and
disobedience.
On 3 September and again on 3 November 1970 you received
Your record further reflects that on 12 and 29 April 1971 you
received NJP for disobedience and a six day period of
unauthorized absence (UA).
summary court-martial (SCM) of an 18 day period of UA and
sentenced to a $100 forfeiture of pay and restriction for 60
days.
martial
On 15 November 1971 you were convicted by special
(SPCM) of a 33 day period of UA and five specifications
On 4 June 1971 you were convicted by
court-
paygrade E-l.
pay, and reduction to
On 23 November 1971 you were notified of proposed actions for an
administrative separation by reason of unfitness due to drug
abuse/misuse.
legal counsel, present your case to an administrative discharge
On 28
board, or submit a letter of rebuttal to the separation.
December 1971 your
At that time you waived the rights to consult with
commanding officer recommended you be issued a
of failure to obey a lawful order.
confinement at hard labor for six months, a $570 forfeiture of
general discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
recommendation noted, in part, as follows:
The
(Member) admitted drug use since entry. His drug usage
included:
methadrine: 3 to 4 times a week; cocaine:
12 to 15 times, opium: twice; heroin: 12 to 15 times;
barbiturates: once, hallucinogens: 18 to 24 times; and
marijuana: 2 to 3 time a week.
Subsequently, the discharge authority approved the foregoing
recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of
unfitness due to drug abuse.
On 18 January 1972 you were so
discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board also
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity and service in Vietnam.
noted that all of your misconduct occurred after you returned
from Vietnam.
However, the Board concluded these factors and
contention were not sufficient to warrant a change in the
characterization of your discharge, narrative reason for
separation, or reenlistment code because of the seriousness of
your repetitive misconduct which included multiple periods of UA
and extensive drug usage.
Individuals discharged by reason of
misconduct normally receive discharges under other than honorable
conditions and the Board noted that you were fortunate to
received a general discharge.
The Board concluded that your
misconduct was sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4
reenlistment code.
separated by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
the circumstances of your case,
discharge, narrative reason for separation, and the assigned
reenlistment code were proper and no changes are warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
Such a code is mandatory when individuals are
Given all
the Board concluded your
2
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
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03764-01
Your allegations of error and 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& appointed place of duty On 25 October 1983 vou received was On 15 November 1983 the BCD was to be executed, Subsequently, the suspension of the forfeitures and BCD were vacated. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden‘is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06798-06
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 an conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Boar found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 2 June 1986 y u enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 12 January 1989 you received NJP for three...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01536 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2012. 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 | CY2008 | 00149-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2008. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05240-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2009. 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 | CY2001 | 01849-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 2000. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. However, on 20 December 1971, you were Your record further reflects that during the period from 12 January to September 1972 you received NJP on two occasions and were convicted twice by SCM. However, the record does...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00338-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 August 2008. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07570-07
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 28 January 1980 at age 18. During the period from 27 August 1982 to 1...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01666-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulatjo~ 5 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 5 October 1979 at age 18, and subsequently extended your enlistment for 12...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01598-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. the Board concluded that the record fully supported processing for...