DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
NAVY
ANNEX
2
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
S
TJR
Docket No: 3831-01
11 February 2002
Dear
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 5 February 2002.
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 Reserve on 9
February 1984 at the age of 18.
Your record reflects that on 16
August 1984, upon completion of your required active service, you
were honorably released from your initial tour of active duty
training and assigned to the a reserve unit.
On 20 December 1984 you were counselled regarding your immature
attitude and not being able to adapt to the Marine Corps way of
life.
At that time you complained of weight loss, an inability
to sleep prior to drill weekend, and a nervous condition, all of
You
which you claimed resulted from being in the Marine Corps.
also stated that you thought of the Marine Corps as killers, and
could not mentally cope with being a killer.
receiving psychiatric assistance and being moved to a less
stressful position to help alleviate your problems, you opted to
stop participating in drills.
Your record contains an administrative remarks entry dated 18
February 1985, which noted, in part,
unauthorized absence (UA) status,
regarding your unsatisfactory drilling performance and the
consequences of not maintaining a satisfactory drill status.
"general other than honorable"
On 18 June 1985
On 9 July 1985 you received an other than honorable
After consulting with legal counsel, you waived your right
On 9 April 1985 you were notified that you were to be
administratively separated with a
discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced
by a random urinalysis test which was conducted on 6 January
1985.
to present your case to an administrative discharge board and to
submit a statement in rebuttal to the discharge.
your commanding officer recommended you be issued a "general
other than honorable" discharge by reason of misconduct due to
However, on 3 July 1985, the discharge authority
drug abuse.
directed your commanding officer to separate you by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse with an other than honorable
discharge because a "general other than honorable" discharge did
not exist.
discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and were
assigned an RE-3B reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity,
honorably during your tour of active duty.
concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of your
narrative reason for separation or reenlistment code because of
your drug related misconduct and your failure to maintain a
satisfactory drilling status.
your case, the Board concluded your discharge, narrative reason
for separation, and reenlistment code were proper as issued and
no change is warranted.
be assigned to a reservist,
of such a code to your was harmless error,
appropriate not to recommend you for reenlistment, and the
adverse reenlistment code has the same meaning.
Further, the
Board noted the letter from the Marine Corps dated 5 April 2001,
which noted, in part,
binding upon other services,
rejecting an applicant.
denied.
Although a reenlistment code should not
the Board concluded that assignment
and your contention that you served
However, the Board
that the
RE-3B reenlistment code is not
who have the option of accepting or
Accordingly, your application has been
Given all the circumstances of
and it would have been
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
2
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 | CY2010 | 08636-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2013 | NR3159-13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable. 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. As such, on 10 July 1984, ‘you enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve and began a period of active duty for training.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 08892 12
A three-member panel of the ‘Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2013. 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 | CY2010 | 04481-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 06601-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2011. On 14 May 1984, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse). 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05801-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 00703-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2012 | 00438 12
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 requested to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), and then later waived your right. 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 | CY2010 | 05222-10
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 15 April 986, you were so discharged. 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 | 05483-00
absence from your appointed Your record further reflects that on 8 March 1985 you received NJP for wrongful use of marijuana and were awarded a $600 forfeiture of pay, extra duty for 14 days, and a reduction to paygrade E-2. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant existence of probable material error or injustice.