DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION O F N A V A L RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 10960-02
16 October 2003
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 15 October 2003. 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.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 August 1978 at age 19.
You served without disciplinary incident until 29 June 1979, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to
your appointed place of duty and failure to obey a lawful order.
The punishment imposed was a $100 forfeiture of pay and
restriction and extra duty for seven days. On 19 September and
again on 26 October 1979 you received NJP for failure to obey a
lawful order, disrespect, and two instances of failure to go to
your appointed place of duty.
During the period from 18 to 22 August 1980 you were in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status for a total of four days,
however, the record does not reflect that any disciplinary action
was taken for this period of UA.
On 8 January 1981 you were convicted by summary court-martial
(SCM) of a 66 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement for
30 days and a $50 forfeiture of pay. On 30 April 1981 you were
convicted by SCM of three periods of UA totalling 50 days. You
were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days,
reduction to paygrade E-1, and a $250 forfeiture of pay.
On 28 July 1981 your commanding officer submitted a written
request for authorization to process you for separation based on
your record of misconduct. This request stated, in part, as
follows:
Request administrative separation authorization by reason of
misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable
nature with military authorities as evidenced by Member's
record of three NJPs and two court-martial convictions.
Member has failed to rise above E-1 .... has established a
clear and unbroken pattern of recidivism regarding UA ....
despite numerous counselling sessions he has shown himself
unresponsive to all leadership efforts .... is considered
incorrigible .... based on his record and apparent
unwillingness to ameliorate his conduct and performance, a
misconduct discharge is considered appropriate.
On 12 August 1981 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel
and to present your case to an administrative discharge board.
Subsequently, your commanding officer recommended an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due a frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
On 17 August 1981 you received a fourth NJP for two periods of UA
totalling four days and were awarded restriction and extra duty
for 14 days and a $80 forfeiture of pay. Shortly thereafter, the
discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by
reason of misconduct, and on 15 October 1981 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 and your assertion that you were
supposed to receive a medical discharge. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive
misconduct which resulted in four NJPs and two court-martial
convictions. 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
existence of probable
on the applicant to demonstrate the
material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
Executive Dir
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09492-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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 8 June 1981 the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08131-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 TJR Docket No: 8131-01 24 May 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. sitting in executive session, considered your A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, application on 21 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05812-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. recommended you be issued an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. 2 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03068-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 23 July 1981 you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05127-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 January 1981 you received your fifth NJP for a 12 day period of UA and were awarded reduction to duty and restriction for 30 days, paygrade E-2, extra and a $250 forfeiture of pay. The record does not, however,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03762-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative of this regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. During the period from 28 March to 23 December 1980 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for a five day period of unauthorized absence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00142-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2003. On 16 October 1980 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. 2 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 | 02901-01
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 Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. paygrade E-2, and correctional On 5 October 1979, while in a UA status, The punishment imposed was a $115 The punishment imposed was a $400 Your record further...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04128-12
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. In February 1980 you were advised that administrative separation action had been initiated by reason of misconduct, but held in abeyance pending a medical evaluation for alcohol abuse. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $598 forfeiture of pay, and a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05461-02
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...