Last saved by: terry.bynum

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SMW
Docket No: 6189-07
5 March 2008

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 rrecords. sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2008. 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.

On 8 August 1985, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 with parental consent. On 16 December 1985 and 26 September 1986, you had nonjudicial punishment for a brief period of unauthorized absence, disobedience of a lawful order, and possession of 2.84 grams of marijuana. On 14 November 1986, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than honorable (0TH) discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 9 December 1986, the separation authority approved the separation recommendation and directed an 0TH discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On 26 January 1987, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth and desire for a better discharge. The Board also considered your belief that your discharge could be upgraded after five years. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your misconduct. You are advised that there is no provision in the law or regulations that allows for recharacterization due solely to the passage of time. Finally, the Board noted that you waived the right to have your case heard by an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. Therefore, 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