Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 09005-03
Original file (09005-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
         2 NAVY ANNEX    
         WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100        

                  SJN
                  Docket No: 09005-03
                  3 August 2004








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 27 July 2004. 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 submit ed was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted fi he Mar~i~ ~ro~ps u ~1 WIy ±9~ aL d~O ~1. During the period from 2 September 1977 to 7 Jun 1978 you received four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for three instances of disrespect, disobedience and absence from your appointed place of duty.
On 27 September 1978 you requested an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial for assault and disobedience. Your request was denied and on 20 October 1978 you were convicted by special courtmartial (SPCM) for those of fences. You were sentenced to 45 days of restriction and reduction to paygrade E-1.
During the period from 28 October to 6 December 1978 you received three more NJP’s for being incapacitated for duty, disobedience, absence from your appointed place of duty, false official statement, and misbehavior as a sentinel.
On 20 December 1978 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct. You then elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 23 January 1979 an ADB found that you had committed misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.
On 24 January 1979 the commanding officer (CO) forwarded your case, concurring with the recommendation of the ADB. In his forwarding letter, the CO stated that after speaking with you, he did not believe you could be salvaged because you blamed your troubles on everyone and everything but yourself. He further stated that although you desired to remain in the Marine Corps, he had no recourse but to recommend discharge under other than honorable conditions due to misconduct. On 7 February 1970 the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and you were so discharged on 27 February 1979.



The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, and personal problems. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the conviction by SPCM and the seven NJP’s. 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,











2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05815-07

    Original file (05815-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Navy on 26 September 1978 at age 20. Nevertheless, the Board found that these...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07443-08

    Original file (07443-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. Nonetheless, you waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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 | NR1416 13

    Original file (NR1416 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08897-06

    Original file (08897-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 25 November 1977 you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent. In connection with this...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11827-08

    Original file (11827-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    | A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 2009. On 30 February 1979 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 | CY2007 | 08151-07

    Original file (08151-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2008. 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 6 March 1980 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions, and on 27 March...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01113-07

    Original file (01113-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Navy on 1 December 1977 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until 8...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04701-10

    Original file (04701-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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 | CY2008 | 06952-08

    Original file (06952-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 May 2009. 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 14 May 1984, administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10658-10

    Original file (10658-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 20 October 1978, you received NIP for being UA for three days. 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.