DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N OF N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y ANNEX
W A S H I N G T O N DC 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
TJR
Docket No: 8758-01
20 June 2002
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 1 8 ' ~ u n e 2002. 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.
Approximately eight months later, on 13 May 1983, you
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 27 September 1982 at the age
of 18.
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two specifications of
wrongful possession of marijuana and possession of alcoholic
beverages in the barracks. The punishment imposed was a $572
forfeiture of pay, half of which was suspended for six months,
restriction and extra duty for 45 days, and reduction to paygrade
E-1.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct by reason of drug
abuse. At that time you waived your rights to consult with legal
counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge
board. On 25 May 1983 your commanding officer recornended an
other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to
drug abuse. The discharge authority directed an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse,
and on 20 July 1983 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 immaturity, post service conduct, and employment
history. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the serious nature of your repetitive drug related
misconduct. 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08114-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2002. 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 16 September 1983 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 21 September 1983 you were so...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07792-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2002. 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 | 06958-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2 0 0 2 . 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 21 December 1983 your commanding officer recommended you be separated under okher than honorable conditions due to drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00312-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2002. Subsequently, you tested positive for marijuana on two random urinalyses of 22 June and 2 August 1983. 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 | CY2002 | 07617-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2003. 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 28 August 1983 the discharge authority then directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, and on 30 August...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06134-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. * You were advanced to RM3 (E-4), extended your enlistment for an additional period of four months, and served without further incident until 15 March 1982, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for use of marijuana. Counsel also noted that the senior member of the ADB was not an 0-4 line officer.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06854-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2002. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05595-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2 0 0 2 . 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 | CY2002 | 07506-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 3 May 2 0 0 3 . 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 served for a year without disciplinary incident, but on 3 1 December 1 9 8 1 , you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for dereliction in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08111-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2002. 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...