DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
NAVY
ANNEX
2
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
Y
S
WMP
Docket No:
19 August 2002
2600-02
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
husband's 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,
application on 14 August 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 husband's naval record and applicable
statutes, regulations and policies.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
Your allegations of error and
considered your
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
Your husband enlisted in the Marine Corps on 14 April 1969 for
four years at age 21. His record reflects that he served without
incident until 30 December 1969,
when he received nonjudicial
punishment for unauthorized absence from 1 to 26 December 1969,
a period of 25 days.
$35 per month for two months,
reduction to
The punishment imposed was a forfeiture of
60 days of restriction, and
paygrade E-l.
On 20 January 1970, your husband provided a written statement
concerning his pre and in-service drug usage including use of
marijuana and LSD from September to December 1969.
On 12 February 1970,
absentee from his unit and remained absent until 23 February
1970, when he was arrested by police in Toronto, Canada and
dour husband became an unauthorized
charged with attempted fraud.
disposition of these charges.
Canada on 2 March 1970 and was held in a local civilian jail
until he was returned to his unit on 13 March 1970.
The record does not contain any
Your husband was deported from
On 13 March 1970, your husband was notified that separation
action was being initiated by reason of unfitness due to drug
abuse, as evidenced by the wrongful purchase, possession/use or
sale of marijuana and LSD.
advised of and waived his
right to counsel and all of his other procedural rights.
He was
On 24 March 1970, your husband was convicted by summary
martial of an unauthorized absence from 12 February to 2 March
1970.
30 days and forfeiture of $80.
authority approved the adjudged sentence and ordered its
execution.
The punishment imposed was confinement at hard labor for
On 2 April 1970, the convening
court-
On 20 March 1970, the separation authority directed your
husband's undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to
his unauthorized use of dangerous drugs and marijuana and, on 22
April 1970, he was so discharged.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors such as your husband's youth
and immaturity, and the fact that it has been 32 years since his
discharge.
court-martial, 46 days of unauthorized absence and his extensive
in-service drug usage supported his undesirable discharge by
reason of unfitness.
no evidence that your husband performed any foreign service,
including service in the Republic of Vietnam.
application has been denied.
of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Accordingly, your
The names and votes of the members
However, the Board concluded that his NJP, summary
Furthermore, the Board noted that there is
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken.
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
You are entitled to have
In this regard,
the Board.
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.
it is important to keep in mind that
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004592
On 7 October 1970, the applicant's unit commander recommended that he be required to appear before a board of officers to consider his separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212. There were no medical records available to the Board and the applicant provided no medical records. Additionally, as stated in Army Regulation 635-212, when separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01212-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. the recommendation, you elected to waive your right to present After review by your case to an administrative discharge board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03503-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 January 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01099-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1969 the commanding officer recommended your husband be issued an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2910-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2014. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given your NUP,...
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 | 01651-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2008. The Board noted that while the Laird Memorandum provided that administrative discharges under other than honorable conditions issued solely on the basis of personal use of drugs or possession of drugs for the purpose of such use would be reviewed for recharacterization, it did not require the recharacterization of each discharge reviewed under that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01130-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 1999. 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 | CY2009 | 00618-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Subsequently, upon his return, on 19 February 1970, he submitted a request for an administrative discharge in order to avoid trial by another court-martial for the additional periods of UA. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007996
He completed his basic training at Fort Bliss, Texas and was transferred to Fort Sam Houston, Texas for his advanced individual training (AIT). There is no evidence to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boardÂ’s 15-year statute of limitations. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.