DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370~5 1 00

TRG
Docket No:9520-05
28 February 2007

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 21 February 2007. 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 11 April 1972 at age 17. During the period from 27 October 1972 to 17 July 1974 you were convicted by a special court-martial and a summary court-martial, and received two nonjudicial punishments. Your offenses three instances of possession of marijuana and theft. Additionally, the record shows that you attended a drug rehabilitation program from 28 March to 26 April 1974 and were counseled on several occasions. On 6 November 1974, you were counseled for the third time concerning substandard performance, poor work habits and involvement with marijuana.

Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an administrative discharge. In connection with this processing, you elected to waive the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board. After review, the discharge authority directed discharge under other than honorable conditions and you were so discharged on 28 January 1975.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and the contentions that your offenses were isolated and you were told that the discharge would be automatically discharged after a period of time. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of misconduct. There is no provision in the law or regulations which would require recharacterization of a discharge based solely on the passage of time. 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

2